UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-4794
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RAHMAN TERRY, a/k/a Rodney, a/k/a Rahman D. Terry,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Thomas E. Johnston,
District Judge. (2:11-cr-00037-1)
Submitted: January 30, 2012 Decided: February 15, 2012
Before WILKINSON, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Jacqueline A. Hallinan, HALLINAN LAW OFFICES, PLLC, Charleston,
West Virginia, for Appellant. R. Booth Goodwin, II, United
States Attorney, William Bryan King, II, Assistant United States
Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Rahman Terry seeks to appeal his conviction and
sentence after pleading guilty to possession with intent to
distribute heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2006).
Terry’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting, in her opinion, that
there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising the
issues of whether Terry’s appeal falls within the scope of his
appellate waiver and whether the district court abused its
discretion by sentencing him as a career offender and ordering
that his sentence run consecutively to his undischarged state
sentence. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal as
barred by Terry’s waiver of the right to appeal included in the
plea agreement. Terry was notified of his right to file a pro
se supplemental brief but has not done so.
Upon review of the plea agreement and the transcript
of the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing, we conclude that Terry
knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal, and the
issues he seeks to raise fall within the scope of the waiver.
Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore grant the Government’s motion to dismiss and
dismiss the appeal. This court requires that counsel inform her
2
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 in this court
for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion
must state that a copy 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
3