United States v. Adrian Weems, 683 F. App'x 544

Adrian Weems pleaded guilty to a federal drug offense under a written plea agreement that included a partial appeal waiver covering his conviction but not his sentence.
He was sentenced by the District Court to the statutory minimum, below the Guidelines range, and received special conditions of supervised release.
Counsel moved to withdraw and submitted an Anders brief challenging: factual basis for the plea, prison-term reasonableness, and supervised-release conditions.
Weems filed pro se claims that his plea was involuntary, challenged Guidelines calculations, and alleged ineffective assistance of counsel; he also sought new appointed counsel.
The appellate court declined to consider the ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal and held the involuntary-plea claim uncognizable because Weems did not move to withdraw his plea in district court.
The court found the partial appeal waiver enforceable, and that any Guidelines errors were harmless because the sentence was the statutory minimum; it affirmed and granted counsel’s motion to withdraw.

Issue	Weems	Government	Held
Validity of ineffective-assistance claim on direct appeal	Claim that counsel was ineffective	Such claims should be litigated collateral proceedings	Denied review on direct appeal; best raised in collateral proceedings (e.g., § 2255)
Cognizability of involuntary-plea claim on direct appeal	Plea was involuntary	No district-court motion to withdraw; claim not preserved	Not cognizable on direct appeal because Weems did not move to withdraw his plea in district court
Sufficiency of factual basis and enforceability of appeal waiver	Factual basis lacking; waiver unenforceable	Plea colloquy and statements establish basis; waiver applies	Waiver enforceable and applicable; factual-basis challenge fails
Sentencing challenges including Guidelines and special conditions	Argued procedural and substantive unreasonableness; Guidelines miscalculated	Sentence lawful (statutory minimum); no significant procedural error; conditions not abuse of discretion	Sentence affirmed; Guidelines errors harmless given statutory-minimum sentence; special conditions upheld

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (requiring counsel to file a brief identifying any nonfrivolous issues when seeking to withdraw)
United States v. Ramirez-Hernandez, 449 F.3d 824 (ineffective-assistance claims are typically litigated in collateral proceedings)
United States v. Foy, 617 F.3d 1029 (involuntary-plea claims are not cognizable on direct appeal if defendant failed to move to withdraw the plea)
United States v. Scott, 627 F.3d 702 (reviewing validity and applicability of plea-appeal waivers de novo)
United States v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886 (en banc) (discussing enforcement of appeal waivers)
Nguyen v. United States, 114 F.3d 699 (defendant’s plea colloquy statements carry a strong presumption of verity)
United States v. David, 682 F.3d 1074 (appellate review standards for sentencing decisions)
United States v. Simons, 614 F.3d 475 (review of special conditions of supervised release for abuse of discretion)
United States v. Chacon, 330 F.3d 1065 (discussing limits on imposing sentences below statutory minimum)
Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (requirement of independent appellate review when counsel seeks to withdraw)