United States v. Clifford Shirley, Jr.

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Clifford Shirley, Jr.

690 F. App'x 125

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedMay 26, 2017

Docket16-4569

StatusUnpublished

This text of 690 F. App'x 125 (United States v. Clifford Shirley, Jr.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Clifford Shirley, Jr., 690 F. App'x 125 (4th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clifford Edward Shirley, Jr., pleaded guilty, pursuant to a Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, to conspiracy with intent to distribute 280 grams or more of cocaine base and 5 kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846 (2012). The parties agreed to a 120-month term of imprisonment, and the district court sentenced Shirley accordingly. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning whether the record contained sufficient evidence to substantiate the drug weights alleged in the indictment. Shirley has filed a pro se supplemental brief raising the same challenge.

“A defendant who pleads guilty ... admits all of the factual allegations made in the indictment, and waives all non-jurisdictional defects, including the right to contest the factual merits of the charges.” United States v. Gosselin World Wide Moving, N.V., 411 F.3d 502, 515 (4th Cir. 2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, by pleading guilty, Shirley waived his right to challenge the sufficiency of the drug weight evidence. See United States v. Willis, 992 F.2d 489, 491 (4th Cir. 1993).

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Shirley’s conviction, and dismiss the appeal from Shirley’s sentence for lack of jurisdiction. See 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a), (c)(1) (2012); United States v. Williams, 811 F.3d 621, 623, 625 (4th Cir. 2016). This court requires that counsel inform Shirley, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Shirley requests that a petition be filed, but *126 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 Shirley.

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.

AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Clifford Edward Shirley, Jr., pleaded guilty, pursuant to a Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C) plea agreement, to conspiracy with intent to distribute 280 grams or more of cocaine base and 5 kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846 (2012). The parties agreed to a 120-month term of imprisonment, and the district court sentenced Shirley accordingly. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning whether the record contained sufficient evidence to substantiate the drug weights alleged in the indictment. Shirley has filed a pro se supplemental brief raising the same challenge.

“A defendant who pleads guilty ... admits all of the factual allegations made in the indictment, and waives all non-jurisdictional defects, including the right to contest the factual merits of the charges.” United States v. Gosselin World Wide Moving, N.V., 411 F.3d 502, 515 (4th Cir. 2005) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). Accordingly, by pleading guilty, Shirley waived his right to challenge the sufficiency of the drug weight evidence. See United States v. Willis, 992 F.2d 489, 491 (4th Cir. 1993).

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Shirley’s conviction, and dismiss the appeal from Shirley’s sentence for lack of jurisdiction. See 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a), (c)(1) (2012); United States v. Williams, 811 F.3d 621, 623, 625 (4th Cir. 2016). This court requires that counsel inform Shirley, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Shirley requests that a petition be filed, but *126 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 Shirley.

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.

AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

690 F. App'x 125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-clifford-shirley-jr-ca4-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack