UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-4121
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMES H. COLEMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt. Alexander Williams, Jr., District Judge.
(CR-01-90)
Submitted: October 15, 2004 Decided: October 25, 2004
Before WILKINSON and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Dennis Murphy, Jr., J. DENNIS MURPHY, JR., P.A., Annapolis,
Maryland, for Appellant. Thomas M. DiBiagio, United States
Attorney, David I. Salem, Assistant United States Attorney,
Greenbelt, Maryland, David Farnham, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,
Washington, D.C., for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James H. Coleman appeals his conviction following his
guilty plea to making a false statement to a federal agency, in
violation 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (2000). Coleman was sentenced to a two-
year term of probation. Because Coleman pleaded guilty and waived
his right to appeal his sentence, he is foreclosed from appealing
any non-jurisdictional issue. See United States v. Willis, 992
F.2d 489, 490 (4th Cir. 1993). Coleman argues that the district
court was without subject matter jurisdiction because his conduct
fell within the “judicial function” exception to making a false
statement set forth in § 1001(b). Because Coleman was charged
with, and convicted of, making a false statement to a federal
agency, it is clear his conduct was not insulated from criminal
liability by § 1001(b). Therefore, the district court properly
possessed subject matter jurisdiction over Coleman’s offense. See
§ 1001(a). Accordingly, we affirm Coleman’s conviction and
sentence. 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.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -