US v. Gerard Wells, No. 13-4309 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4309 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. GERARD ONEIL WELLS, a/k/a J, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (0:08-cr-00608-JFA-2) Submitted: March 20, 2014 Decided: April 10, 2014 Before AGEE, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James P. Craig, CRAIG LAW FIRM, PC, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. William N. Nettles, United States Attorney, Robert F. Daley, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Gerard ONeil Wells seeks to appeal the district court s amended judgment resentencing him to the lower mandatory minimum applicable to his drug conspiracy conviction under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 and Dorsey v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2321 (2012). On appeal, Wells contends that his sentence is unreasonable under 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (2012) and that his appeal waiver does not foreclose review of the issue. The Government contends that Wells waived the right to appeal his sentence, and his appeal should be dismissed. Plea bargains We dismiss the appeal. rest on contractual principles, each party should receive the benefit of its bargain. and United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 173 (4th Cir. 2005) (citation and internal quotations omitted). A defendant may waive the right to appeal his conviction and sentence so long as the waiver is knowing and voluntary. United States v. Davis, 689 F.3d 349, 354 (4th Cir. 2012) (citing United States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496 (4th Cir. 1992)). We review the validity of an appeal waiver de novo and will enforce the waiver if it is valid and the issue appealed is within the scope of the waiver. Id. (citing Blick, 408 F.3d at 168). Upon review of the plea agreement and the transcript of the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing, we conclude that Wells knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal and that 2 the issue he seeks to raise on appeal falls within the scope of the waiver. Wells waived the right to contest either the conviction or sentence in any direct appeal or post-conviction action. On appeal, he contends that his waiver does not foreclose review of the issue he seeks to raise, because he was not aware that he would be sentenced to an unreasonable sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3553, and his sentence is illegal because it violates 18 U.S.C. § 3553. without merit. We conclude that these arguments are See United States v. Thornsbury, 670 F.3d 532, 537-39 (4th Cir. 2012). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials We dispense with legal contentions are before this and court argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
