UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4136

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JAMES OWEN HAGINS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior 

District Judge. (5:15-cr-00260-F-1)

Submitted: September 13, 2016 Decided: September 16, 2016

Before TRAXLER, AGEE, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam 

opinion.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Eric J. Brignac, 

Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for 

Appellant. Kristine L. Fritz, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant 

United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

James Hagins pled guilty to distribution of child 

pornography, 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2), (b)(1) (2012). The district 

court sentenced him to 235 months’ imprisonment. Counsel has filed 

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

stating that, in counsel’s view, there are no meritorious issues 

for appeal, but questioning the reasonableness of the sentence. 

Although advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, 

Hagins has not done so. The Government has filed a motion to 

dismiss the appeal based on the appeal waiver in Hagins’ plea 

agreement. We affirm in part, and dismiss in part.

“A defendant may waive the right to appeal his conviction and 

sentence so long as the waiver is knowing and voluntary.” United 

States v. Davis, 689 F.3d 349, 354 (4th Cir. 2012) (citing United 

States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496 (4th Cir. 1992)). We review 

the validity of an appeal waiver de novo, and we “will enforce the 

waiver if it is valid and the issue appealed is within the scope 

of the waiver.” Id. at 354-55 (citing United States v. Blick, 408 

F.3d 162, 168 (4th Cir. 2005)). 

We have reviewed the plea agreement and the Fed. R. Crim. P. 

11 hearing, and we conclude that Hagins’ guilty plea and his appeal 

waiver were knowing and voluntary. We therefore conclude that the 

waiver is valid and enforceable. Hagins’ challenge to the 

reasonableness of his sentence is foreclosed by the appellate 
3

waiver. Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss 

the appeal, in part. 

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record for 

any potentially meritorious, unwaived issues, and we have found 

none. We therefore affirm Hagins’ conviction and dismiss the 

appeal as to his sentence. This court requires that counsel inform 

Hagins, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of 

the United States for further review. If Hagins requests that a 

petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would 

be frivolous, then counsel may move this court for leave to 

withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a 

copy thereof was served on Hagins. 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.

AFFIRMED IN PART;

DISMISSED IN PART