Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 30 views

    Unpublished

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) The defendant, John Robert Myers, pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base. He was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) Myers' attorney filed an Anders brief questioning whether the plea hearing and waiver of appellate rights were adequate. The court reviewed the record and found no issues, determining that Myers understood the plea and that it was knowing and voluntary. 3) The court also determined that Myers had already received the benefit of Amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines, which reduced penalties for crack cocaine, and that his sentence was reasonable. The court therefore affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    Unpublished

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    30 views5 pages
    1) The defendant, John Robert Myers, pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base. He was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) Myers' attorney filed an Anders brief questioning whether the plea hearing and waiver of appellate rights were adequate. The court reviewed the record and found no issues, determining that Myers understood the plea and that it was knowing and voluntary. 3) The court also determined that Myers had already received the benefit of Amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines, which reduced penalties for crack cocaine, and that his sentence was reasonable. The court therefore affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-01-14 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-4443

    Original Title

    United States v. Myers, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) The defendant, John Robert Myers, pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base. He was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) Myers' attorney filed an Anders brief questioning whether the plea hearing and waiver of appellate rights were adequate. The court reviewed the record and found no issues, determining that Myers understood the plea and that it was knowing and voluntary. 3) The court also determined that Myers had already received the benefit of Amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines, which reduced penalties for crack cocaine, and that his sentence was reasonable. The court therefore affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    30 views5 pages

    Unpublished

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) The defendant, John Robert Myers, pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine and cocaine base. He was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) Myers' attorney filed an Anders brief questioning whether the plea hearing and waiver of appellate rights were adequate. The court reviewed the record and found no issues, determining that Myers understood the plea and that it was knowing and voluntary. 3) The court also determined that Myers had already received the benefit of Amendment 706 to the sentencing guidelines, which reduced penalties for crack cocaine, and that his sentence was reasonable. The court therefore affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 5

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 10-4443

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    JOHN ROBERT MYERS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
    (4:08-cr-01072-RBH-6)

    Submitted:

    December 21, 2010

    Decided:

    January 14, 2011

    Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Russell W. Mace, III, THE MACE FIRM, Myrtle Beach, South


    Carolina, for Appellant.
    Arthur Bradley Parham, Rose Mary
    Sheppard Parham, Assistant United States Attorneys, Florence,
    South Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Appellant John Robert Myers pled guilty to one count
    of conspiracy to distribute fifty or more grams of cocaine base
    and five kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
    841(a)(1),(b)(1)(A)

    (2006).

    The

    Myers to 120 months imprisonment.

    district

    court

    sentenced

    Myers timely appealed.

    Myers attorney has filed a brief in accordance with


    Anders

    v.

    California,

    adequacy

    of

    Myers

    hearing;

    whether

    386

    U.S.

    Federal

    Myers

    738

    Rule

    of

    knowingly

    and

    (1967),

    questioning

    Criminal

    Procedure

    voluntarily

    waived

    the
    11
    his

    appellate rights; and whether Amendment 706 to the United States


    Sentencing

    Guidelines

    applies

    to

    this

    case.

    Myers

    received

    notice of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but did


    not do so.

    Because we find no meritorious grounds for appeal,

    we affirm.
    First,

    Myers

    adequately

    advised

    him

    relatedly,

    whether

    his

    knowing and voluntary.

    questions
    during
    waiver

    whether
    his
    of

    the

    Rule
    his

    11

    district

    court

    hearing,

    appellate

    rights

    and,
    was

    Prior to accepting a guilty plea, a

    district court must conduct a plea colloquy in which it informs


    the defendant of, and determines that the defendant comprehends,
    the nature of the charge to which he is pleading guilty, any
    mandatory

    minimum

    penalty,

    the

    maximum

    possible

    penalty

    he

    faces, and the rights he is relinquishing by pleading guilty.


    2

    Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b); United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114,


    116 (4th Cir. 1991).

    In reviewing the adequacy of compliance

    with Rule 11, this Court should accord deference to the trial
    courts decision as to how best to conduct the mandated colloquy
    with the defendant.

    DeFusco, 949 F.2d at 116.

    We have thoroughly reviewed the record in this case,


    and conclude that the district court complied with the mandates
    of Rule 11 in accepting Myers guilty plea.

    Thus, we hold that

    the record affirmatively shows there was a factual basis for


    Myers

    plea,

    Myers

    understood

    the

    constitutional

    rights

    he

    waived in pleading guilty, and Myers guilty plea including


    his appellate waiver was knowing and voluntary.
    Next,

    Myers

    questions

    whether

    Amendment

    706

    to

    the

    United States Sentencing Guidelines, which provided for a twolevel downward adjustment to the base offense level assigned
    to each threshold quantity of crack listed in the Drug Quantity
    Table in section 2D1.1, should have resulted in a reduced base
    United States v. Brewer, 520 F.3d

    offense level in this case.


    367, 373 (4th Cir. 2008).
    already

    received

    the

    The record affirmatively shows Myers

    benefit

    of

    Amendment

    706,

    as

    his

    base

    offense level was calculated pursuant to the 2008 edition of the


    Sentencing

    Guidelines,

    November 1, 2007.

    and

    Amendment

    706

    became

    effective

    Brewer, 520 F.3d at 373 (citing United States

    Sentencing

    Commn,

    Report

    to

    Congress:

    Cocaine

    and

    Federal

    Sentencing Policy (May 2007)).


    Finally, we conclude Myers sentence was reasonable.
    This

    court

    reviews

    district

    courts

    sentence

    reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard.

    for

    Gall v.

    United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also United States v.
    Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473-74 (4th Cir. 2007).
    defendant, a district court must:

    When sentencing a

    (1) properly calculate the

    Guidelines range; (2) determine whether a sentence within that


    range serves the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) (2006);
    (3) implement mandatory statutory limitations; and (4) explain
    Pauley, 511 F.3d at 473.

    its reasons for selecting a sentence.


    In

    the

    Fourth

    Sentencing

    Circuit,

    Guidelines

    [a]

    range

    sentence
    is

    within

    presumptively

    the

    proper

    reasonable.

    United States v. Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007); see
    also

    Rita

    v.

    United

    States,

    551

    U.S.

    338,

    347-56

    (2007)

    (upholding presumption of reasonableness for a within-Guidelines


    sentence).
    Here,

    the

    district

    court

    followed

    the

    necessary

    procedural steps in sentencing Myers, properly calculating the


    Guidelines

    sentence,

    considering

    sentencing

    Myers

    the

    crime.

    to

    the

    mandatory

    3553(a)

    minimum

    factors,

    sentence

    for

    and
    his

    Hence, we determine that the sentence imposed by the

    district court was reasonable.


    4

    In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record


    in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
    We therefore affirm the district courts judgment.

    This court

    requires that counsel inform Myers, in writing, of the right to


    petition

    the

    Supreme

    Court

    of

    the

    United

    States

    for

    further

    review.

    If Myers requests that a petition be filed, but counsel

    believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel


    may

    move

    in

    representation.

    this

    court

    for

    leave

    to

    withdraw

    from

    Counsels motion must state that a copy thereof

    was served on Myers.


    We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
    legal
    before

    contentions
    the

    court

    are

    adequately

    and

    argument

    presented

    would

    not

    in
    aid

    the
    the

    materials
    decisional

    process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like