UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-4538
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DAVID C. BOWEN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Chief District Judge.
(CR-98-425-JFM)
Submitted: January 13, 2000 Decided: January 19, 2000
Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joseph J. Trepel, LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH J. TREPEL, Rockville,
Maryland, for Appellant. Lynne A. Battaglia, United States Attor-
ney, Joyce K. McDonald, Assistant United States Attorney, Balti-
more, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
David C. Bowen appeals his conviction, entered upon a written
plea agreement, of mail fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1341
(West 1994 & Supp. 1999). As part of his written plea agreement,
Bowen expressly waived his right to appeal any sentence falling
within the statutory range, except for the right to appeal based on
an upward or downward departure from the guideline range estab-
lished at sentencing. Following an extensive Fed. R. Crim. P. 11
hearing, the district court accepted Bowen's plea, and sentenced
him to eighteen months imprisonment, thirty-six months supervised
release, a $50 special assessment, and restitution in the amount of
$250,000.
Bowen claims on appeal that the district court erred in
ordering him to pay $250,000 restitution when he had no present
ability to pay, claiming that the investments on which the district
court based its restitution order were speculative. As to this
claim, we find that Bowen knowingly and voluntarily waived his
right to appeal. See United States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496
(4th Cir. 1992).
We therefore dismiss Bowen’s appeal. 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
2
United States v. David C. Bowen
Combined Opinion