UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-4844
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ERIKA RIKER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Danville. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior
District Judge. (CR-03-57)
Submitted: October 29, 2004 Decided: November 22, 2004
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Patterson Rogers, 3rd, Danville, Virginia, for Appellant. John
L. Brownlee, United States Attorney, Anthony P. Giorno, Assistant
United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Erika Jean Riker pled guilty to possession of fifty grams
or more of cocaine base (crack) with intent to distribute, 21
U.S.C. § 841 (2000), and was sentenced to a term of 121 months
imprisonment. Under the terms of her plea agreement, Riker waived
the right to appeal her sentence. She now seeks to appeal the
district court’s determination at sentencing that she was not
entitled to an adjustment for acceptance of responsibility, U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1 (2002), and did not qualify
for a reduction under the safety valve provision, USSG
§ 2D1.1(b)(6). For the reasons explained below, we dismiss the
appeal.
A defendant may waive the right to appeal if that waiver
is knowing and voluntary. United States v. Brown, 232 F.3d 399,
402-03 (4th Cir. 2000); United States v. Broughton-Jones, 71 F.3d
1143, 1146 (4th Cir. 1995). To determine whether a waiver is
knowing and voluntary, this Court examines the background,
experience, and conduct of the defendant, as well as the
defendant’s familiarity with the plea agreement. United States v.
General, 278 F.3d 389, 400 (4th Cir. 2002) (internal citation
omitted). If the district court fully questions a defendant
regarding the waiver of his right to appeal during the Fed. R.
Crim. P. 11 colloquy, the waiver is usually both valid and
enforceable. United States v. Wessells, 936 F.2d 165, 167-68 (4th
- 2 -
Cir. 1991); United States v. Wiggins, 905 F.2d 51, 53-54 (4th Cir.
1990). The transcript of Riker’s guilty plea hearing reveals that
the district court adequately questioned Riker about her
understanding of the waiver provision and that her waiver was
knowingly and intelligently made.
We therefore dismiss the 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
- 3 -