UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-4562

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

TITUS TERRELL GRADY, a/k/a Hell Rell, 

Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III, 

Chief District Judge. (7:12-cr-00127-D-1) 

Submitted: January 27, 2014 Decided: January 31, 2014

Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam 

opinion. 

Marilyn G. Ozer, MASSENGALE & OZER, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, 

for Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
2

PER CURIAM: 

Titus Terrell Grady pleaded guilty, pursuant to a 

written plea agreement, to conspiracy to distribute and possess 

with intent to distribute 100 grams or more of heroin, in 

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2012). The district court 

calculated Grady’s Guidelines range under the U.S. Sentencing 

Guidelines Manual (2012) at 262 to 327 months’ imprisonment and 

sentenced Grady to 312 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, Grady’s 

counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious 

issues for appeal, but questioning whether the 312-month 

sentence is reasonable. The Government has moved to dismiss the 

appeal of Grady’s sentence based on the waiver of appellate 

rights included in the plea agreement. We dismiss in part and 

affirm in part. 

A defendant may waive the right to appeal if that 

waiver is knowing and intelligent. United States v. Poindexter, 

492 F.3d 263, 270 (4th Cir. 2007). Generally, if the district 

court fully questions a defendant regarding the waiver of his 

right to appeal during a plea colloquy performed in accordance

with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, the waiver is both valid and 

enforceable. United States v. Johnson, 410 F.3d 137, 151 

(4th Cir. 2005). Whether a defendant validly waived his right 
3

to appeal is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. 

United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 168 (4th Cir. 2005). 

Our review of the record leads us to conclude that 

Grady knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his

312-month sentence. We therefore grant the Government’s motion 

to dismiss and dismiss the appeal of Grady’s sentence. Although 

Grady’s appeal waiver insulates his sentence from appellate 

review, the waiver does not prohibit our review of his 

conviction pursuant to Anders. In accordance with Anders, we 

have reviewed the remainder of the record in this case and have 

found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm 

Grady’s conviction and dismiss the appeal of his sentence. 

This court requires that counsel inform Grady, in 

writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the 

United States for further review. If Grady 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 Grady. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
4

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

DISMISSED IN PART;

AFFIRMED IN PART