UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-4954

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff - Appellee, 

v. 

PATRICK AARON WAZNY, 

Defendant - Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. Louise W. Flanagan,

Chief District Judge. (7:10-cr-00125-FL-1) 

Submitted: April 24, 2012 Decided: May 10, 2012

Before KEENAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. 

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam 

opinion. 

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois, 

Assistant Federal Public Defender, James E. Todd, Jr., Research 

and Writing Attorney, Raleigh, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 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: 

Patrick Aaron Wazny pleaded guilty, pursuant to a 

written plea agreement, to one count of distribution of child 

pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2252(a)(1) (West 2006 

& Supp. 2011), and one count of possession of child pornography, 

in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2252(a)(2). The district court 

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

Guidelines Manual (2010) at 324 to 360 months’ imprisonment and 

sentenced Wazny to 240 months’ imprisonment on the distribution 

count and a consecutive sentence of 100 months’ imprisonment on 

the possession count, for a total imprisonment term of 340 

months. On appeal, Wazny’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 district court erred in the manner in which it determined 

that consecutive prison terms were warranted in Wazny’s case. 

The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal of Wazny’s 

sentence based on his waiver of appellate rights. 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 the plea colloquy performed in accordance 
3

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 

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 

Wazny knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his 

340-month prison sentence. We therefore grant the Government’s 

motion to dismiss and dismiss the appeal of Wazny’s sentence. 

Although Wazny’s appeal waiver insulates his sentence from 

appellate review, the waiver does not prohibit our review of his 

convictions 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 review. We therefore affirm 

Wazny’s convictions and dismiss the appeal of his sentence. 

This Court requires that counsel inform Wazny, in 

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

United States for further review. If Wazny 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 Wazny. 

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 
4

before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

DISMISSED IN PART;

AFFIRMED IN PART