USCA4 Appeal: 25-4280 Doc: 27 Filed: 12/02/2025 Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 25-4280

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MYQUAN TAQUIL HOUSTON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:24-cr-00238-D-BM-1)

Submitted: November 25, 2025 Decided: December 2, 2025

Before WYNN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.

ON BRIEF: Helen C. Smith, Apex, North Carolina, for Appellant. David A. Bragdon, Assistant United States Attorney, Jake Pugh, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: 25-4280 Doc: 27 Filed: 12/02/2025 Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:

Myquan Taquil Houston appeals his convictions and the 262-month sentence

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

distribute 40 grams or more of a substance containing fentanyl, in violation of

(a)(1), (b)(1)(B), 846, and possession with intent to distribute 40 grams or more of

a substance containing fentanyl and 500 grams or more of cocaine, in violation of

(a)(1), (b)(1)(B). Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California,

(1967), stating that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. Although notified of

his right to do so, Houston has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. The Government has

moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by the appeal waiver included in Houston’s plea

agreement, by which he waived his “right to appeal the conviction and whatever sentence

is imposed on any ground,” with limited exceptions not applicable here. Houston opposes

the motion. We dismiss in part and affirm in part.

We review the validity of an appeal waiver de novo. United States v. Boutcher,

(4th Cir. 2021). “When the government seeks to enforce an appeal waiver

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

issue being appealed falls within the scope of the waiver.”

(citation modified). “A

valid appeal waiver is one entered by the defendant knowingly and intelligently, a

determination that we make by considering the totality of the circumstances.”

(citation

modified). Our review of the record confirms that Houston knowingly, voluntarily, and

intelligently executed the appeal waiver. We therefore dismiss the appeal as to all issues

within its scope.

2 USCA4 Appeal: 25-4280 Doc: 27 Filed: 12/02/2025 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 outside the scope of Houston’s valid appeal

waiver. We therefore grant the Government’s motion to dismiss, in part, and dismiss the

appeal as to all issues covered by the waiver. We otherwise affirm.

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

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