USA v. Melvin Nance

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Melvin Evins Nance. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam.

Download PDF
Case: 14-14595 Date Filed: 05/26/2015 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 14-14595 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 2:14-cr-00006-LGW-JEG-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus MELVIN EVINS NANCE, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Georgia ________________________ (May 26, 2015) Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN and JILL PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 14-14595 Date Filed: 05/26/2015 Page: 2 of 2 Melvin Evins Nance plead guilty to escape from custody, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 751, and the District Court sentenced him to a prison term of 31 months, well within the Guidelines sentence range of 27 to 33 months. He appeals his sentence, arguing that the District Court committed procedural error: in determining the Guidelines sentence range, the court erred in increasing the sentence range on the ground that he used force against another person. He further argues that the altercation upon which the court relied was unrelated to the charged escape and therefore did not consist of relevant conduct. We need not reach the merits of Nance’s appeal. The District Court stated at sentencing that it would have imposed the same sentence based on the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) sentencing factors, regardless of the Guidelines sentence range. In light of this statement, any procedural error the court may have committed in calculating the sentence range was harmless. United States v. Kapordelis, 569 F.3d 1291, 1315 (11th Cir. 2009). AFFIRMED. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?