US v. Jose Campa-Macias, No. 08-4446 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-4446 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOSE ROSA CAMPA-MACIAS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:06-cr-00070-FDW-1) Submitted: December 17, 2009 Decided: December 23, 2009 Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David L. Hitchens, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID L. HITCHENS, PLLC, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jose Rosa Campa-Macias pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute cocaine and aiding and abetting in violation of 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(A) (West 1999 & Supp. 2009) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (2006) and was sentenced to seventy-one months of imprisonment. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising the following issue: whether Campa-Macias voluntarily consented to the search of his vehicle which contained the drugs at issue. By pleading guilty Campa-Macias has waived all antecedent non-jurisdictional defects, including the denial of a motion to suppress. Tollett v. Henderson, 411 U.S. 258, 267 (1973); United States v. Willis, 992 F.2d 489, 490 (4th Cir. 1993). Once a plea of guilty has become final, this Court s inquiry is limited to whether the underlying plea was counseled and voluntary. (1989). United States v. Broce, 488 U.S. 563, 569 Our review of the record reveals Campa-Macias knowingly and voluntarily pled guilty. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. court. writing, Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district This court requires that counsel inform his client, in of his right to petition 2 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 this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral contentions argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before the court are and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 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.
