United States of America v. HARRY JAMES BELLAMY, II, a/k/a Little

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 22-4550
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
HARRY JAMES BELLAMY, II, a/k/a Little,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence.
Sherri A. Lydon, District Judge. (4:20-cr-00718-SAL-3)
Submitted: April 25, 2023 Decided: April 27, 2023
Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, THACKER, Circuit Judge, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Dismissed in part and affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
ON BRIEF: Louis H. Lang, CALLISON TIGHE & ROBINSON, LLC, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Everett E. McMillian, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE
OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Florence, South Carolina; Kathleen Michelle
Stoughton, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Harry James Bellamy, II, seeks to appeal his conviction and the 151-month sentence
imposed following his guilty plea to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to
distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),
(b)(1)(A), 846. Bellamy’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386
U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that there are no meritorious issues for appeal but questioning
whether the district court abused its discretion by overruling Bellamy’s objections to the
presentence report when calculating his advisory Sentencing Guidelines range. Bellamy
did not file a pro se supplemental brief after being notified of his right to do so. The
Government has moved to dismiss the appeal as barred by Bellamy’s waiver of the right to
appeal included in the plea agreement.
Where, as here, the Government seeks to enforce an appeal waiver and Bellamy has
not alleged a breach of the plea agreement, we will enforce the waiver if it is valid and the
issue raised on appeal falls within the scope of the waiver. United States v. Boutcher, 998
F.3d 603, 608 (4th Cir. 2021). Our review of the plea hearing leads us to conclude that
Bellamy knowingly and intelligently waived his right to appeal and that the waiver is valid
and enforceable. Bellamy’s challenges to his sentence fall squarely within the waiver’s
scope, and we have reviewed the record in accordance with Anders and have identified no
potentially meritorious issues that would fall outside the scope of the waiver. Accordingly,
we grant the Government’s motion to dismiss Bellamy’s appeal as to all issues within the
waiver’s scope and affirm the remainder of the district court’s judgment.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
This court requires that counsel inform Bellamy, in writing, of the right to petition
the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Bellamy 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 Bellamy. 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 of 3 --