United States v. Alvester Williams, Jr.

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: June 17, 2024
• Docket: 23-4670
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

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UNPUBLISHED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Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 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

2 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.

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART