Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Kevin Earl ELROD, Defendant - Appellant.
Kevin Earl Elrod pleaded guilty to Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (2018), and discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(iii) (2018). The district court sentenced Elrod to 197 months in prison. He filed a timely notice of appeal.
On appeal, Elrod challenges only his firearms conviction, arguing that Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). He acknowledges, however, that we rejected that position in United States v. Mathis, 932 F.3d 242, 265-66 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, ––– U.S. ––––, 140 S. Ct. 639, 205 L.Ed.2d 401 (2019). The Government argues that the appeal should be dismissed because it falls within the scope of the appeal waiver contained in Elrod’s plea agreement.
We will enforce an appeal waiver if it is valid and the issue appealed is within the scope of the waiver. United States v. Davis, 689 F.3d 349, 355 (4th Cir. 2012). A waiver is valid if it is knowing and voluntary, based on an evaluation of the totality of the circumstances. United States v. Copeland, 707 F.3d 522, 528 (4th Cir. 2013). Elrod does not challenge the validity of his appeal waiver, and we conclude from our review of the record that his waiver was both knowing and voluntary. See United States v. Thornsbury, 670 F.3d 532, 537 (4th Cir. 2012). Moreover, Elrod’s only argument on appeal falls squarely within the scope of his waiver, foreclosing review.
Accordingly, we dismiss Elrod’s appeal. 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
PER CURIAM:
Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Docket No: No. 19-4462
Decided: March 12, 2020
Court: United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)