UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 21-4638

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

SAMUEL ARNETT, JR., a/k/a Samuel Arnette, Jr.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:20-cr-00141-D-1)

Submitted: May 10, 2023 Decided: May 17, 2023

Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: G. Alan DuBois, Federal Public Defender, Jennifer C. Leisten, Assistant 

Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Raleigh,

North Carolina, for Appellant. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, 

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 21-4638 Doc: 20 Filed: 05/17/2023 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Samuel Arnett, Jr., seeks to appeal his below-Guidelines range sentence after 

pleading guilty to three drug and firearm offenses. On appeal, Arnett’s attorney has filed 

a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising two sentencing issues 

but concluding there are no nonfrivolous grounds for appeal. The Government has moved 

to dismiss the appeal as barred by Arnett’s appeal waiver. Arnett was notified of his right 

to file a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so. We dismiss the appeal.

“When the government seeks to enforce an appeal waiver and has not breached the 

plea agreement, we will enforce the waiver if it is valid and if the issue being appealed falls 

within the scope of the waiver.” United States v. Boutcher, 998 F.3d 603, 608 (4th Cir. 

2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). “A ‘valid’ appeal waiver is one entered by the 

defendant knowingly and intelligently, a determination that we make by considering the 

totality of the circumstances.” Id. “When a district court questions a defendant during a 

Rule 11 hearing regarding an appeal waiver and the record shows that the defendant 

understood the import of his concessions, we generally will hold that the waiver is valid.” 

Id. We review this issue de novo. Id.

Upon our review of the record, we conclude that Arnett knowingly and voluntarily 

waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, and the issues raised on appeal fall

within the scope of the waiver. Moreover, we have reviewed the record for any potentially 

meritorious issues that might fall outside the waiver and have found none. 

Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss the appeal. This court 

requires that counsel inform Arnett, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court 

USCA4 Appeal: 21-4638 Doc: 20 Filed: 05/17/2023 Pg: 2 of 3
3

of the United States for further review. If Arnett requests that a petition be filed, but 

counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this 

court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy 

thereof was served on Arnett. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal 

contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

USCA4 Appeal: 21-4638 Doc: 20 Filed: 05/17/2023 Pg: 3 of 3