USCA4 Appeal: 23-4153 Doc: 29 Filed: 11/22/2023 Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-4153

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

NORMAN LAQUINN HEWETT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:20-cr-00163-D-1)

Submitted: November 16, 2023 Decided: November 22, 2023

Before AGEE and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed in part, dismissed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Mitchell G. Styers, BANZET, THOMPSON, STYERS & MAY, PLLC, Warrenton, North Carolina, for Appellant. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, John Gibbons, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-4153 Doc: 29 Filed: 11/22/2023 Pg: 2 of 4

PER CURIAM:

Norman Laquinn Hewett seeks to appeal the 108-month sentence imposed

following his guilty plea to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute

500 grams or more of cocaine and 28 grams or more of cocaine base, in violation of

(b)(1)(B), 846; possession with intent to distribute 28 grams or more of

cocaine base, in violation of

(a)(1), (b)(1)(B); and possession of a firearm

by a felon, in violation of

(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (2018). * Hewett’s counsel has

filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,

(1967), questioning whether

Hewett’s sentence is reasonable. Although informed of his right to file a pro se

supplemental brief, Hewett has not done so.

The Government has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that

Hewett’s appeal is barred by the appeal waiver included in the plea agreement. We review

de novo the validity of an appeal waiver. United States v. Cohen,

(4th

Cir. 2018). Where, as here, the Government seeks to enforce the appeal waiver and has

not breached the plea agreement, we will enforce the waiver if it is valid and the issue being

appealed falls within the waiver’s scope. United States v. Manigan,

(4th

Cir. 2010). A defendant validly waives his appeal rights if he agreed to the waiver

* Section 924(a)(2) was amended and no longer provides the penalty for § 922(g) convictions; the new penalty provision in

(a)(8) sets forth a statutory maximum sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment for a § 922(g) offense. See Bipartisan Safer Communities Act,

(c),

, 1329 (2022). The 15- year statutory maximum does not apply in this case, however, because Hewett committed the offense before the June 25, 2022, amendment of the statute.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-4153 Doc: 29 Filed: 11/22/2023 Pg: 3 of 4

“knowingly and intelligently.”

To determine whether a waiver is knowing and

intelligent, “we consider the totality of the circumstances, including the experience and

conduct of the defendant, his educational background, and his knowledge of the plea

agreement and its terms.” United States v. McCoy,

(4th Cir. 2018)

(internal quotation marks omitted). Generally, “if a district court questions a defendant

regarding the waiver of appellate rights during the [Fed. R. Crim. P.] 11 colloquy and the

record indicates that the defendant understood the full significance of the waiver, the

waiver is valid.”

(internal quotation marks omitted).

Upon review of the plea agreement and the transcript of the Rule 11 hearing, we

conclude that Hewett knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal and that any

challenge to his sentence falls squarely within the compass of the appellate waiver.

Accordingly, we grant the Government’s motion in part.

Pursuant to Anders, we have reviewed the entire record and have found no

meritorious issues for appeal that fall outside the scope of the appeal waiver. We therefore

affirm the remainder of the district court’s judgment. This court requires that counsel

inform Hewett, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States

for further review. If Hewett requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such

a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw

from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on

Hewett.

3 USCA4 Appeal: 23-4153 Doc: 29 Filed: 11/22/2023 Pg: 4 of 4

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED IN PART, DISMISSED IN PART

4