US v. Barton Adams, No. 13-4203 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4203 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BARTON JOSEPH ADAMS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (3:08-cr-00077-JPB-JES-1) Submitted: January 30, 2014 Decided: March 12, 2014 Before MOTZ, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. David Schles, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID SCHLES, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Alan McGonigal, Michael D. Stein, Assistant United States Attorneys, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Barton Joseph Adams pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to one count of health care fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1347 (2012), and one count of tax evasion, in violation of sentenced 26 U.S.C. Adams imprisonment release. and to § 7201 (2012). concurrent concurrent The of terms terms of district fifty three years court months supervised The district court also ordered that Adams forfeit $3,724,721 and pay restitution. On appeal from the judgment of conviction and the district court s post-judgment order denying several of Adams then-pending motions as moot, Adams counsel has filed a brief raising six California, Adams issues 386 trial proceedings for U.S. counsel below, review. 738 Pursuant (1967), rendered whether counsel Anders questions ineffective Adams to whether assistance rights under v. in the the Sixth Amendment and the Speedy Trial Act were violated, whether the district court erred in finding that Adams had been restored to competency prior to the entry of his guilty plea, and whether the district counsel. court Counsel erred also in denying questions Adams whether requests the for district new court erred in holding Adams in contempt in the proceedings below and whether the court erred in denying a motion to release him from incarceration on the contempt finding. 2 Relying on the appeal waiver in the plea agreement, the Government moves to dismiss the appeal. Adams has filed several pro se supplemental briefs. We dismiss in part and affirm in part. A defendant may waive the waiver is knowing and intelligent. right to appeal if that United States v. Poindexter, 492 F.3d 263, 270 (4th Cir. 2007). Generally, if the district court fully questions a defendant regarding the waiver of his right to appeal during a plea colloquy performed in accordance with Fed. R. enforceable. Crim. United (4th Cir. 2005). P. 11, States the v. waiver Johnson, is 410 both F.3d valid and 137, 151 Whether a defendant validly waived his right to appeal is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 168 (4th Cir. 2005). Our review of the record leads us to conclude that Adams knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal his convictions, fifty-month prison sentence, the three-year period of supervised release, and the forfeiture the district court imposed. We also conclude that counsel does not raise on appeal any issue falling outside of the compass of Adams waiver of appellate rights. We further conclude that with the exception of his complaint regarding the Bureau of Prisons failure to award him sentencing and good-time credit and his challenge to the district court s order of restitution Adams does not raise in his pro se supplemental briefs any issues falling outside of 3 the compass of the appeal waiver. Accordingly, we grant the Government s motion to dismiss Adams appeal as to all issues except those that we deem exempt from Adams valid and enforceable waiver of appellate rights. Although Adams appeal waiver insulates his convictions, prison sentence, term of supervised release, and the district court s imposition of forfeiture from appellate review, the waiver does not preclude our consideration of Adams pro se claims regarding the computation of his sentence and challenging the order of restitution or prohibit our review of the remainder of the record pursuant to Anders. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed these claims and the remainder of the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Adams convictions and sentence to the extent our obligation pursuant to Anders extends to matters not precluded by the appeal waiver in Adams plea agreement. We further deny Adams motions to appoint counsel, for release pending appeal, and for an expedited decision on appointment of counsel. This writing, of court the requires right to that petition United States for further review. counsel the inform Supreme Adams, Court of in the If Adams requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for 4 leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Adams. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials decisional process. DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART 5
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.
