USCA4 Appeal: 23-4460 Doc: 19 Filed: 02/29/2024 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-4460

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

STANLEY JEROME HARRIS,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:22-cr-00197-WO-1)

Submitted: February 27, 2024 Decided: February 29, 2024

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, Kathleen A. Gleason, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Nicole Royer DuPre, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-4460 Doc: 19 Filed: 02/29/2024 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Stanley Jerome Harris pled guilty, pursuant to a written plea agreement, to

possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of

(a)(1),

(b)(1)(B). The district court sentenced Harris to a sentence within the advising Sentencing

Guidelines range of 235 months’ imprisonment. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to

Anders v. California,

(1967), asserting that there are no meritorious grounds

for appeal but questioning whether Harris’ guilty plea is valid. Although notified of his

right to file a pro se supplemental brief, Harris has not done so. The Government declined

to file a brief and did not seek enforcement of the appellate waiver. ∗

Because Harris did not seek to withdraw his guilty plea in the district court, we

review the adequacy of the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing for plain error. United States v.

McCoy,

(4th Cir. 2018). “Under the plain error standard, [we] will

correct an unpreserved error if (1) an error was made; (2) the error is plain; (3) the error

affects substantial rights; and (4) the error seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public

reputation of judicial proceedings.” United States v. Harris,

(4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks omitted). Our review of the record leads us to

conclude that Harris entered his guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily and that a factual

basis supported the plea. See United States v. DeFusco,

(4th Cir. 1991). Discerning no plain error, we conclude that Harris’ guilty plea is valid.

∗ Because the Government has not moved to enforce the appellate waiver, we conduct a full review pursuant to Anders. See United States v. Poindexter,

(4th Cir. 2007).

2 USCA4 Appeal: 23-4460 Doc: 19 Filed: 02/29/2024 Pg: 3 of 3

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have

found no meritorious grounds for appeal. We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment.

This court requires that counsel inform Harris, in writing, of the right to petition the

Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Harris 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 Harris.

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

3