United States v. Ricardo Anthony Shakellwood
696 F. App'x 631
4th Cir.2017Background
- Defendant Ricardo Shakellwood pled guilty to illegal reentry by an aggravated felon under a written plea agreement and was sentenced to 48 months.
- Plea agreement contained a clear, separate appellate-waiver clause waiving appeals of conviction and sentence (with limited exceptions).
- At the Rule 11 colloquy Shakellwood: was 52, completed 11th grade, not impaired, said he read and signed the plea, was satisfied with counsel, and admitted guilt.
- Shakellwood (pro se) challenged a 12-level Sentencing Guidelines enhancement, characterization of trafficked marijuana as “high-grade,” and failure to credit cooperation.
- The Government moved to enforce the appellate waiver; the court reviewed the waiver’s knowingness and scope and performed an Anders review of the record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Shakellwood) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of appellate waiver | Waiver was coerced/forfeited his right to appeal | Waiver was knowing and intelligent based on plea and colloquy | Waiver valid and enforceable |
| Scope of waiver re: sentencing claims | Challenges to enhancement, drug characterization, and lack of credit for cooperation | Sentencing issues fall within waiver of appeals of sentence and Guidelines-range issues | Claims fall within waiver and are barred |
| Correctness of 12-level enhancement | Enhancement was improper (merits) | Not reached because waiver bars appeal | Merits not considered; appeal dismissed |
| Requirement of Anders review | N/A — counsel filed Anders brief asserting possible issues | Court must still review record for non-frivolous issues | Court conducted Anders review, found no meritorious issues, and dismissed appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967) (procedure when counsel seeks to withdraw and asserts appeal is frivolous)
- United States v. Copeland, 707 F.3d 522 (4th Cir. 2013) (de novo review of appeal-waiver validity)
- United States v. Blick, 408 F.3d 162 (4th Cir. 2005) (two-prong test: knowing waiver and scope coverage)
- United States v. General, 278 F.3d 389 (4th Cir. 2002) (totality of circumstances for knowing and intelligent waiver)
- United States v. Johnson, 410 F.3d 137 (4th Cir. 2005) (district court colloquy regarding waiver supports validity)
- United States v. Wessells, 936 F.2d 165 (4th Cir. 1991) (waiver plain-language and questioning factors)