UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4302
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
WILLIAM A. MUWWAKKIL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior
District Judge. (5:05-cr-00004-F)
Submitted: April 30, 2007 Decided: June 1, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
William Woodward Webb, THE EDMISTEN & WEBB LAW FIRM, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Anne Margaret Hayes, Banumathi Rangarajan,
Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
William A. Muwwakkil pled guilty to conspiracy to commit
wire fraud and bank fraud, as well as to make material false
statements, against the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 371 (2000). The Government has moved to dismiss Muwwakkil’s
appeal based upon the waiver of appellate rights in his plea
agreement.
We conclude that Muwwakkil’s waiver encompasses all
issues raised on appeal except his claim of ineffective assistance
of counsel. We have reviewed that claim and determine that it does
not “conclusively appear[]” on the record that counsel was
ineffective. United States v. Richardson, 195 F.3d 192, 198 (4th
Cir. 1999) (internal quotation marks omitted). Muwwakkil may raise
his ineffective assistance claim in proceedings under 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2000). Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to
dismiss with respect to issues covered by the waiver, but affirm
the district court’s judgment in rejecting the ineffective
assistance of counsel claim.
This court requires that counsel inform his client, in
writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United
States for further review. If the client requests that a petition
be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be
frivolous, then counsel may move this court for leave to withdraw
from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy
- 2 -
thereof was served on the client. 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 IN PART AND
AFFIRMED IN PART
- 3 -