US v. Jerome Reid, No. 13-4582 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4582 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JEROME REID, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (2:12-cr-00010-D-3) Submitted: July 29, 2014 Before GREGORY Circuit Judge. and WYNN, Decided: Circuit Judges, and August 6, 2014 DAVIS, Senior Affirmed in part; dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jennifer Haynes Rose, LAW OFFICE OF JENNIFER HAYNES ROSE, Cary, North Carolina, for Appellant. Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jerome Reid pleaded guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. ยงยง 846, 841(b)(1)(B) (2012), and was sentenced to 180 months imprisonment. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but questioning whether the district court erred in assessing a two-point enhancement and calculating the drug quantity associated with the offense, sentence. and challenging the reasonableness of Reid s Although advised of his right to file a supplemental pro se brief, Reid has not done so. The Government seeks to dismiss the appeal as untimely and as barred by the appellate waiver provision in the plea agreement. By prior order, we remanded the appeal to the district court to determine whether to extend the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4). The district court found good cause to extend the appeal period, and therefore the appeal is timely and not subject to dismissal on that basis. We therefore proceed to consider the alternate basis for dismissal the appellate waiver. de novo the validity of an appellate waiver. Government s We review United States v. Copeland, 707 F.3d 522, 528 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 2 126 (2013). We generally will enforce a waiver . . . if the record establishes that the waiver is valid and that the issue being appealed States v. (internal is within Thornsbury, the scope F.3d marks quotation 670 and of the 537 532, waiver. (4th alteration United Cir. 2012) omitted). A defendant s waiver is valid if he agreed to it knowingly and intelligently. United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 627 (4th Cir. 2010). Although the validity of an appeal waiver often depends on the adequacy of the plea colloquy, the issue ultimately is evaluated circumstances, Cir. 2012) by reference to the totality of the United States v. Davis, 689 F.3d 349, 355 (4th (internal quotation marks omitted), such as the experience and conduct of the accused, as well as the accused s educational background and familiarity with the terms of the plea agreement. Thornsbury, 670 F.3d at 537 (internal quotation marks omitted). Our review of the record leads us to conclude that Reid knowingly and intelligently right to appeal his sentence. pled guilty and waived his Because the sentencing issues he seeks to raise on appeal fall within the scope of the waiver, we grant the Government s motion to dismiss Reid s appeal of his sentence and dismiss this portion of the appeal. Although the waiver provision in the plea agreement precludes review of the sentence, the waiver does not preclude 3 review of any errors in Reid s conviction that may be revealed pursuant to the review required by Anders. Anders, we nothing that conviction. have calls United of into the entire question record the and validity have found of Reid s Thus, as to the conviction, we affirm. This writing, reviewed In accordance with court his States requires right for to further that counsel petition the review. If inform Supreme Reid Reid, Court requests of in the that a petition be filed, but 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 Reid. We dispense with oral legal contentions are before this and argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials court argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED IN PART; DISMISSED IN PART 4
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.
