UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4301
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
ARTAVIOUS QUONTA BODDIE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:13-cr-00278-BO-1)
Submitted: November 18, 2014 Decided: December 4, 2014
Before THACKER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam
opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Eric J. Brignac,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States
Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Artavious Quonta Boddie pled guilty in accordance with
a written plea agreement to conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act
robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(b) (2012), and brandishing a firearm
in furtherance of a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)
(2012). Boddie was sentenced to 151 months in prison for the
conspiracy and eighty-four months, consecutive, for the firearm
offense. He now appeals. His attorney has filed a brief
pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising
one issue but stating that there are no meritorious issues for
appeal. Boddie was advised of his right to file a pro se
supplemental brief but did not file such a brief. The United
States moves to dismiss the appeal based on a
waiver-of-appellate-rights provision in the plea agreement.
Boddie opposes the motion. We affirm in part and dismiss in
part.
The appeal waiver did not apply to Boddie’s
convictions. Having reviewed the entire record, we hold that:
the district court substantially complied with Fed. R. Crim. P.
11; there was a factual basis for the plea; the plea was
knowingly and voluntarily entered; and the plea agreement is
binding and enforceable. Accordingly, we affirm the
convictions.
2
In the plea agreement, Boddie waived his right to
appeal his sentence. * Upon review of the record, we conclude
that the waiver is valid and enforceable. We further find that
the issue Boddie seeks to raise on appeal — whether the sentence
is reasonable — falls within the scope of the waiver.
Accordingly, we grant the motion to dismiss the appeal insofar
as the motion relates to sentencing.
Pursuant to Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
for meritorious, nonwaivable issues and have found none. We
therefore affirm in part and dismiss in part. This court
requires that counsel inform Boddie, in writing, of his right to
petition the Supreme Court of the United State for further
review. If Boddie requests that such a petition be filed, but
counsel believes that the petition would be frivolous, then
counsel may move in this court for leave to
withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that
a copy of the motion was served on Boddie. We dispense with
oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
*
Boddie waived his right “to appeal whatever sentence is
imposed on any ground, . . . reserving only the right to appeal
from a sentence in excess of the advisory Guideline range that
is established at sentencing, . . . excepting the Defendant’s
right to appeal based upon grounds of ineffective assistance of
counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. . . .” Boddie was
sentenced within his Guideline range.
3
adequately presented in the materials before the court and
argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART;
DISMISSED IN PART
4