Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 14-4537
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:12-cr-00575-RBH-1)
Submitted:
KEENAN,
Decided:
Circuit
Judges,
and
July 8, 2015
DAVIS,
Senior
PER CURIAM:
Pursuant to a written plea agreement, Archie LaRue Evans
pled guilty to one count of mail fraud, in violation of 18
U.S.C. 1341 (2012), and one count of conspiracy to structure
transactions
with
financial
institution
to
evade
currency
counsel
California,
386
has
U.S.
filed
738
brief
(1967),
pursuant
stating
that
to
Anders
there
are
v.
no
meritorious grounds for appeal, but asserting that Evans did not
knowingly
and
voluntarily
waive
his
right
to
appeal,
and
Counsel also
misconduct.
For
the
reasons
that
follow,
we
affirm.
As a preliminary matter, Evans plea agreement contained a
waiver-of-appellate-rights provision.
appeal
waivers.
and
we
decline
to
sua
sponte
enforce
appellate
168 (4th Cir. 2005) (citing United States v. Brock, 211 F.3d 88,
next
substantive
review
Evans
reasonableness
discretion standard.
(2007).
sentence
for
under
both
procedural
deferential
and
abuse-of-
significant
procedural
error,
such
as
Id. at 51.
improperly
If there is no
reasonableness
under
the
totality
of
the
Id.
properly
Guidelines
calculated
is
reasonable.
United
States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir. 2014), cert.
denied, 135 S. Ct. 421 (2014).
measured
factors.
against
Id.
the
[18
U.S.C.]
3553(a)
[(2012)]
also
and
ineffective.
counsel,
asserts
the
that
both
court-appointed
his
privately-retained
public
defender
were
Evans
must
show
that
(1)
3
counsels
performance
was
constitutionally
deficient
was prejudicial.
(1984).
To
and
(2)
such
deficient
performance
the
performance
prong,
Evans
must
at
688.
The
prejudice
prong
is
satisfied,
within
the
Hill
the
face
of
the
record,
such
claims
are
not
generally
United States v.
Because the
Evans
contends
that
prosecutorial
misconduct
In
accordance
with
Anders,
we
have
reviewed
the
entire
may
move
representation.
in
and
materials
legal
before
court
for
leave
to
withdraw
from
this
contentions
are
adequately
this
and
argument
court
presented
would
not
in
the
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED