UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4042
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
LAYT KHALIL MOHAMMAD YOUNIS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Clinton. James C. Dever III,
Chief District Judge. (5:09-cr-00338-D-1)
Submitted: September 25, 2012 Decided: October 23, 2012
Before MOTZ, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Kristine L. Fritz, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant
United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Layt Khalil Mohammad Younis seeks to appeal his
sentence after pleading guilty. Younis’s attorney has filed a
brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
raising the issue of whether the district court erred when it
based the length of the sentence on his need for drug treatment,
but concluding that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal
due to Younis’s waiver of the right to appeal included in the
plea agreement. The Government has moved to dismiss the appeal
as barred by the appeal waiver. Younis 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 Younis
knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal, and the
issue he seeks to raise falls within the scope of the waiver.
Moreover, in accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case for any potentially meritorious issues that might
fall outside the scope of the waiver and have found none.
Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion to
dismiss the appeal. 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 in this court
2
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