UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 02-4929
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DERRICK DAVIS, a/k/a Robert Smith,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 02-4930
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DERRICK DAVIS, a/k/a Robert Smith,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (CR-02-39-FO)
Submitted: May 29, 2003 Decided: June 3, 2003
Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
No. 02-4929 dismissed and No. 02-4930 affirmed by unpublished per
curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Jeanette Doran Brooks, Research
and Writing Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant
United States Attorney, Banumathi Rangarajan, Assistant United
States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
2
PER CURIAM:
In No. 02-4929, Derrick Davis appeals his convictions and
sentence for two counts of bank robbery. However, he concedes in
his brief that he waived his right to appeal these convictions in
his plea agreement. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.
In No. 02-4930, Davis appeals his conviction and sentence for
criminal contempt of court in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 401 (2000),
claiming there is insufficient evidence to support the conviction.
Criminal contempt of court is defined, in part, as the
“[m]isbehavior of any person in its presence or so near thereto as
to obstruct the administration of justice.” § 401. Davis’
behavior interrupted the district court’s effort at concluding the
sentencing hearing and his subsequent inflammatory remarks were
clearly directed at disrupting the respect and decorum of the
court. See United States v. Murphy, F.3d , 2003 WL 1879128
(4th Cir. Apr. 16, 2003). Accordingly, we conclude sufficient
evidence supports the conviction, and we affirm the order of the
district court in this case.
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.
No. 02-4929 - DISMISSED
No. 02-4930 - AFFIRMED
3