US v. Darren L. Robinson

Filing 920080603

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4983 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DARREN L. ROBINSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Thomas E. Johnston, District Judge. (5:07-cr-00012) Submitted: May 29, 2008 Decided: June 3, 2008 Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jason D. Parmer, PARMER LAW OFFICE, Hinton, West Virginia, for Appellant. Miller A. Bushong, III, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Beckley, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Darren L. Robinson appeals the 168-month career offender sentence imposed by the district court after he pled guilty to distribution of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) (2000). Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), suggesting that the district court erred by denying Robinson's motion for a downward departure from the advisory guideline range. Counsel states, however, that there Robinson was informed are no meritorious issues before the court. of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but he has not done so. We affirm. Counsel questions whether the district court erred by denying the motion for downward departure. A district court's failure to grant a downward departure is not reviewable unless the district court was under the mistaken impression that it lacked the authority to depart. (4th Cir. 2008). United States v. Brewer, 520 F.3d 367, 371 Here, there is no evidence that the district Thus, we decline to court misunderstood its authority to depart. review this claim. In accordance with Anders, we have thoroughly reviewed the record and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further - 2 - review. If the client 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 We dispense with oral argument because was served on the client. the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED - 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?