US v. Fred Jimmy Condrey, Jr., No. 11-4347 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: Unpublished opinion after submission on briefs: Dismissed
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-4347 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. FRED JIMMY CONDREY, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, Senior District Judge. (2:09-cr-00322-PMD-1) Submitted: October 27, 2011 Decided: November 7, 2011 Before MOTZ, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. O. Grady Query, Paul N. Uricchio, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellant. William N. Nettles, United States Attorney, E. Jean Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Fred court s Jimmy 240-month Condrey, appeals following sentence Jr., his from the guilty district plea to one count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2006), and one count of possession with marijuana, in intent to violation of distribute 21 U.S.C. methamphetamine § 841(a)(1). and Condrey challenges his sentence as unreasonable, arguing that the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006) factors warranted a significantly lower sentence and Condrey s that prior the district statements attributable to him. in court erred calculating in the considering drug weight The Government filed a responsive brief arguing that, because Condrey waived his right to appeal his sentence, this court should dismiss Condrey s appeal. In his reply valid. brief, Condrey argued that his waiver was not Concluding that Condrey validly waived his right to appeal his sentence, and that the issues raised are within the scope of the waiver, we dismiss his appeal. A defendant may waive the right to appeal if that United States v. Poindexter, waiver is knowing and intelligent. 492 F.3d 263, 270 (4th Cir. 2007). The question of whether a defendant validly waived his right to appeal is a question of law that we review de novo. United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, We 168 (4th Cir. 2005). 2 look to the totality of the circumstances to determine whether a particular waiver is knowing and intelligent. United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 627 (4th Cir. 2010). Our review of the record leads us to conclude that Condrey did knowingly and voluntarily waive the right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Both of the issues raised in Condrey s brief fall within the scope of the waiver. We therefore dismiss Condrey s appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and 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.
