United States v. Matt Davis
669 F. App'x 683
| 4th Cir. | 2016Background
- Matt Davis pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(c)(1)(C), to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute "bath salts."
- The district court sentenced Davis to 156 months imprisonment.
- Davis appealed; counsel filed an Anders brief identifying three possible issues: Rule 11 plea colloquy compliance, ineffective assistance of counsel, and prosecutorial misconduct.
- Davis did not move to withdraw his plea in the district court and did not raise prosecutorial-misconduct below.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed unpreserved claims for plain error and reviewed the record under Anders; the court found no meritorious issues and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Davis) | Defendant's Argument (Gov't) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rule 11 compliance | Plea hearing may not have complied with Rule 11; plea possibly not knowing/voluntary | Plea colloquy was substantially compliant; plea was knowing and voluntary | No plain error; plea was knowing and voluntary |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel | Counsel’s performance rendered plea decision unknowing or involuntary | Record does not conclusively show ineffective assistance; claim premature on direct appeal | Claim not conclusively shown on record; should be raised under §2255 if at all |
| Prosecutorial misconduct | Prosecutor’s conduct rendered plea involuntary or otherwise prejudiced Davis | No constructive showing of improper conduct; presumption of regularity applies | No plain error; Davis failed to show improper or prejudicial prosecutorial conduct |
| Anders representation review | Counsel’s Anders brief overlooked meritorious issues | Court must independently review record under Anders | Independent review found no meritorious issues; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (establishes counsel’s obligations when filing a brief asserting appeal is frivolous)
- United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517 (4th Cir. 2002) (plain-error standard for unpreserved Rule 11 challenges)
- United States v. Galloway, 749 F.3d 238 (4th Cir. 2014) (ineffective-assistance claims on direct appeal permissible only if record conclusively shows deficiency)
- United States v. Baptiste, 596 F.3d 214 (4th Cir. 2010) (ineffective-assistance claims generally developed in §2255 proceedings)
- United States v. Caro, 597 F.3d 608 (4th Cir. 2010) (elements for proving prosecutorial misconduct)
- United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456 (presumption of regularity in prosecutorial decisions)
- United States v. Alerre, 430 F.3d 681 (4th Cir. 2005) (plain-error review for prosecutorial-misconduct claims not raised below)