US v. Chester Wheeless, No. 14-4248 (4th Cir. 2014)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-4248 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. CHESTER LAMAR WHEELESS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:13-cr-00238-F-1) Submitted: November 20, 2014 Decided: December 9, 2014 Before KING, DUNCAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Phillip A. Rubin, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Chester Lamar Wheeless pleaded guilty to obstruction of commerce by robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (2012), and brandishing a firearm in relation to a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) (2012). The district court sentenced Wheeless to 141 months of imprisonment and he now appeals. For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the appeal. On plainly appeal, erred in Wheeless failing to argues provide that the him an district court opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea after rejecting one of the non-binding Guidelines stipulations in the plea agreement. has asserted that Wheeless’ appellate The Government waiver in the plea agreement bars review of this claim. Pursuant to a plea agreement, a defendant may waive his appellate rights under 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (2012). States v. Wiggins, 905 F.2d 51, 53 (4th Cir. 1990). United A waiver will preclude appeal of a specific issue if the waiver is valid and the issue is within the scope of the waiver. States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162, 168 (4th Cir. 2005). United Whether a defendant validly waived his right to appeal is a question of law that this court reviews de novo. Id. at 168. “The validity of an appeal waiver depends on whether the defendant knowingly and intelligently agreed to waive the right 2 to appeal.” Id. at 169. questions defendant a Generally, if the district court fully regarding the waiver of his right to appeal during the Rule 11 colloquy, the waiver is both valid and enforceable. United States v. Johnson, 410 F.3d 137, 151 (4th Cir. 2005); United States v. Wessells, 936 F.2d 165, 167-68 (4th Cir. 1991). We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that Wheeless knowingly and intelligently agreed to waive his right to appeal and that the issue Wheeless seeks to raise on appeal falls squarely within the scope of the appellate waiver. 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 in the decisional process. DISMISSED 3