23-8073-cr United States v. Williams

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

SUMMARY ORDER

Rulings by summary order do not have precedential effect. Citation to a summary order filed on or after January 1, 2007, is permitted and is governed by Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 32.1 and this court’s Local Rule 32.1.1. When citing a summary order in a document filed with this court, a party must cite either the Federal Appendix or an electronic database (with the notation “summary order”). A party citing a summary order must serve a copy of it on any party not represented by counsel.

At a stated term of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, held at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, in the City of New York, on the 6th day of December, two thousand twenty four.

PRESENT: José A. Cabranes, Richard C. Wesley, Steven J. Menashi, Circuit Judges. ____________________________________________

United States of America,

Appellee,

v. No. 23-8073-cr

Shatiara Williams,

Defendant-Appellant. ____________________________________________ For Appellee: Katherine A. Gregory, Assistant United States Attorney, for Trini E. Ross, United States Attorney for the Western District of New York, Buffalo, New York.

For Defendant-Appellant: David R. Morabito, Law Office of David R. Morabito, East Rochester, New York.

Appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the Western

District of New York (Geraci, J.). Upon due consideration, it is hereby ORDERED,

ADJUDGED, and DECREED that the appeal is DISMISSED.

Defendant Shatiara Williams appeals from the judgment of December 19,

2023, sentencing her to twenty-seven months in prison. Williams pleaded guilty to

one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute

cocaine, in violation of

and 846. We assume the parties’ familiarity

with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues on appeal.

Williams argues that the government breached her plea agreement and that

the district court inaccurately calculated her guidelines range. Having reviewed

the record and arguments on appeal, we hold that the government did not breach

the plea agreement. As a result, the appellate waiver in the agreement bars her

remaining challenge to the sentence of the district court.

2 For the foregoing reasons, we DISMISS this appeal.

FOR THE COURT: Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk of Court

3