USCA4 Appeal: 24-4057 Doc: 36 Filed: 01/28/2025 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-4057

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JANE ELLEN CAMPBELL,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. James K. Bredar, Senior District Judge. (1:23-cr-00036-JKB-2)

Submitted: January 23, 2025 Decided: January 28, 2025

Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Justin Eisele, SEDDIQ LAW FIRM, Rockville, Maryland, for Appellant. Paul E. Budlow, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 24-4057 Doc: 36 Filed: 01/28/2025 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Jane Ellen Campbell pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to distribution of

child pornography, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(2), 2256. The district court

sentenced Campbell to 210 months’ imprisonment. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief

pursuant to Anders v. California,

(1967), stating that there are no meritorious

grounds for appeal but asking us to review the district court’s assessment of the

(a) factors and rationale for the imposed sentence. Although advised of her right to

file a pro se supplemental brief, Campbell has not done so. The Government has moved

to dismiss pursuant to the appeal waiver in Campbell’s plea agreement. We dismiss in part

and affirm in part.

We review the validity of an appellate waiver de novo and “will enforce the waiver

if it is valid and the issue appealed is within the scope of the waiver.” United States v.

Adams,

(4th Cir. 2016). A waiver is valid if it is “knowing and

voluntary.”

To determine whether a waiver is knowing and voluntary, “we consider

the totality of the circumstances, including the experience and conduct of the defendant,

[her] educational background, and [her] knowledge of the plea agreement and its terms.”

United States v. McCoy,

(4th Cir. 2018) (internal quotation marks

omitted). As a general rule, “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).

2 USCA4 Appeal: 24-4057 Doc: 36 Filed: 01/28/2025 Pg: 3 of 3

Our review of the record confirms that Campbell knowingly and voluntarily waived

her right to appeal her conviction and sentence. We therefore conclude that the waiver is

valid and enforceable and that the lone issue advanced within the Anders brief falls within

the scope of the waiver. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in

this case and have found no potentially meritorious grounds for appeal beyond the scope

of Campbell’s valid appellate waiver. We therefore grant the Government’s motion in part

and dismiss the appeal as to any issues within the scope of the waiver. We otherwise affirm

the criminal judgment.

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

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

DISMISSED IN PART, AFFIRMED IN PART

3