Full text
United States v. Alvester Williams, Jr.
USCA4 Appeal: 23-4670 Doc: 30 Filed: 06/17/2024 Pg: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 23-4670
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ALVESTER AARON WILLIAMS, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Richard E. Myers, II, Chief District Judge. (5:22-cr-00227-M-KS-1)
Submitted: June 13, 2024 Decided: June 17, 2024
Before RUSHING and HEYTENS, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: G. Alan DuBois, Federal Public Defender, Jennifer C. Leisten, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, Lucy Partain Brown, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. *2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-4670 Doc: 30 Filed: 06/17/2024 Pg: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Alvester Aaron Williams, Jr., pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to
conspiracy to commit bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344(1), (2). The district
court sentenced him to 44 months’ imprisonment, to be followed by five years of
supervised release. On appeal, Williams’ counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal
but questioning whether Williams’ sentence is procedurally reasonable. Although notified
of his right to do so, Williams has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. The Government
has moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by Williams’ waiver of the right to appeal
included in the plea agreement. We dismiss in part and affirm in part.
Our review of the record confirms that Williams knowingly, voluntarily, and
intelligently waived his right to appeal and, thus, that the appeal waiver is valid and
enforceable. See United States v. Boutcher, 998 F.3d 603, 608 (4th Cir. 2021) (explaining
that “we will enforce [a] waiver” as to any issue within its scope if “the totality of the
circumstances” reflect that the defendant entered into the waiver “knowingly and
intelligently” (internal quotation marks omitted)). In accordance with Anders, we have
reviewed the entire record and have found no meritorious grounds for appeal that fall
outside the waiver’s scope. We therefore grant the Government’s motion to dismiss in part
and dismiss the appeal as to all issues covered by the waiver. We otherwise affirm the
criminal judgment.
This court requires that counsel inform Williams, in writing, of the right to petition
the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Williams requests that a *3 USCA4 Appeal: 23-4670 Doc: 30 Filed: 06/17/2024 Pg: 3 of 3
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 Williams. We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court
and argument would not aid the decisional process.