United States v. Moore, 042219 FED4, 18-4480
|Opinion Judge:||PER CURIAM:|
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. LARRY BRANDON MOORE, Defendant-Appellant.|
|Attorney:||Larry Brandon Moore, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.|
|Judge Panel:||Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||April 22, 2019|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit|
Submitted: April 18, 2019
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:17-cr-00144-RJC-DSC-1)
Larry Brandon Moore, Appellant Pro Se.
Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Larry Brandon Moore pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to two counts of mailing threatening communications in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 876(c) (2012). The district court sentenced him to 27 months in prison. He timely appealed.
The Government filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the basis of an appellate waiver provision in Moore's plea agreement. In the plea agreement, Moore agreed to waive his right to challenge his conviction or sentence on any ground, except for appeals based on ineffective assistance of counsel or prosecutorial misconduct. Moore also explicitly reserved his right to appeal the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment.
An appellate waiver is enforceable "if the record establishes that the waiver is valid and that the issue being appealed is within the scope of the waiver." United States v. Thornsbury, 670 F.3d 532, 537 (4th Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). Because Moore's appeal challenges the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss the indictment, we conclude that Moore's appeal falls outside the scope of the appellate waiver provision, and we deny the Government's motion to dismiss the appeal.
We grant Moore's...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP