US v. Williams
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus RONALD WILLIAMS, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:05-cr-00301-D)
July 16, 2007
July 27, 2007
Before MOTZ and GREGORY, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United State Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Ronald Williams pled guilty to possessing a firearm, having been convicted of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924. The district court sentenced Williams to Williams timely appealed, arguing
eighty-five months in prison.
that the district court miscalculated his criminal history points and erroneously determined that he held a leadership role. affirm. After the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), this court reviews a sentence to determine whether the district court has correctly calculated the advisory guidelines range and has considered the range, as well as the factors set out in § 3553(a), and whether the sentence is reasonable. 2005). First, Williams argues the district court misapplied U. S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4A1.2, comment. (n.11) (2005), resulting in an increased criminal history score. We conclude the United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540, 546 (4th Cir. We
district court correctly interpreted § 4A1.2 and properly applied the guideline when it calculated Williams's criminal history score. Williams also argues the district court erroneously
assigned him two points for holding a leadership role in criminal activity pursuant to USSG § 3B1.1(c). We conclude the district
court properly applied a leadership enhancement because Williams
- 2 -
provided the funds involved in the transaction and directed another participant to purchase a specific type of firearms. We therefore affirm Williams's sentence. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
- 3 -
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?