Court Opinion

ID: 9908489
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-08 21:00:30.950401+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:12.546843
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-4392      Doc: 29         Filed: 12/07/2023    Pg: 1 of 3

                                            UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                              No. 22-4392

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                            Plaintiff - Appellee,

                     v.

        TERRANCE JONATHAN BUTLER,

                            Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at
        Greensboro. Loretta C. Biggs, District Judge. (1:21-cr-00251-LCB-1)

        Submitted: November 8, 2023                                  Decided: December 7, 2023

        Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, Lisa S. Costner, Assistant Federal
        Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Winston-Salem,
        North Carolina, for Appellant. Nicole Royer DuPre, Assistant United States Attorney,
        OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
        Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4392       Doc: 29         Filed: 12/07/2023      Pg: 2 of 3

        PER CURIAM:

               Terrance Jonathan Butler seeks to appeal his sentence after pleading guilty to

        possession with intent to distribute 28 grams or more of cocaine base in violation of 21

        U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B). On appeal, Butler’s attorney has filed a brief under Anders

        v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising the issue of whether his sentence is reasonable

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

        to dismiss the appeal as barred by Butler’s appeal waiver. Butler 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.

               “We have consistently held that appellate waivers in valid plea agreements are

        enforceable.” United States v. Soloff, 993 F.3d 240, 243 (4th Cir. 2021). “Plea agreements

        are grounded in contract law, and as with any contract, each party is entitled to receive the

        benefit of his bargain.” United States v. Edgell, 914 F.3d 281, 287 (4th Cir. 2019) (internal

        quotation marks omitted). But, there is “a ‘narrow class of claims that we have allowed a

                                                      2
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4392      Doc: 29         Filed: 12/07/2023     Pg: 3 of 3

        defendant to raise on direct appeal despite a general waiver of appellate rights.’” United

        States v. Moran, 70 F.4th 797, 802 n.3 (4th Cir. 2023). “An appeal waiver does not preclude

        a defendant from challenging a sentence ‘based on a constitutionally impermissible factor’

        or ‘a sentence imposed in excess of the maximum penalty provided by statute.’” United

        States v. Cornette, 932 F.3d 204, 209 (4th Cir. 2019). Moreover, we will not enforce an

        appeal waiver if doing so “would result in a ‘miscarriage of justice.’” United States v.

        McKinney, 60 F.4th 188, 192 (4th Cir. 2023). “[T]o establish such a miscarriage of justice,

        a defendant need only make ‘a cognizable claim of actual innocence.’” Id.

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

        waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, and the issue raised on appeal falls

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

        of the United States for further review. If Butler 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 Butler. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal

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

        not aid the decisional process.

                                                                                       DISMISSED

                                                     3