UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-4333
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TRAVIS JERMAINE WRIGHT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (3:09-cr-00967-JFA-1)
Submitted: October 28, 2011 Decided: November 3, 2011
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished
per curiam opinion.
Langdon D. Long, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Megan
Moricle, Third-year Law Student, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellant. Robert Frank Daley, Jr., Assistant United States
Attorney, James Chris Leventis, Jr., OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Travis Jermaine Wright pled guilty, pursuant to a
written plea agreement, to one count of possession with intent
to distribute 5 grams or more of crack cocaine and possession of
a weapon in connection with a drug trafficking offense, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2006) and 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1)
(2006), and was sentenced to a total term of 120 months
imprisonment. Wright noted a timely appeal. Counsel has filed
a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
asserting that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal but
questioning whether the district court complied with Fed. R.
Crim. P. 11 in accepting Wright’s guilty plea and whether
Wright’s sentence was reasonable. Wright has filed a pro se
supplemental brief in which he challenges the initial car stop
and the search incident to his arrest.
We have reviewed the transcript of Wright’s guilty
plea hearing and find that the district court fully complied
with the mandates of Rule 11. The court ensured that Wright
understood the charges against him, the potential sentence he
faced, and the rights he was giving up by pleading guilty. See
United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d at 116 (4th Cir. 1991).
Moreover, Defendant entered his plea knowingly and voluntarily,
and the plea was supported by a sufficient factual basis. Id.
at 19-20.
2
To the extent Wright seeks to raise a Fourth Amendment
challenge to the initial car stop which led to his arrest, his
valid guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional antecedent
defects, including constitutional challenges to the pretrial
proceedings. See Menna v. New York, 423 U.S. 61, 62-63 n.2
(1975); Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, 267 (1973). We
therefore affirm Wright’s conviction.
The Government has filed an unopposed motion to vacate
Wright’s sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance with
the Fair Sentencing Act, Pub. L. No. 111–220, 124 Stat. 2372
(“FSA”). In light of the Attorney General’s revised view on the
retroactivity of the FSA, as well as the development of case law
on this point in other jurisdictions, we consider it
appropriate, without indicating any view as to the outcome, to
accord the district court an opportunity to consider the matter
in the first instance. *
We therefore affirm Wright’s conviction, grant the
consent motion to vacate his sentence, and remand to the
district court for resentencing. This court requires that
counsel inform Wright, in writing, of the right to petition the
Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If
*
In light of this disposition, we decline to address
counsel’s challenge to the procedural reasonableness of Wright’s
sentence.
3
Wright requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes
that such a 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 thereof was served on
Wright. 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 IN PART,
VACATED IN PART,
AND REMANDED
4