US v. Aristeo M. Lopez

Filing 920080915

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-5034

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ARISTEO MELGAREJO LOPEZ, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:06-cr-00330-JAB)

Submitted:

September 11, 2008

Decided:

September 15, 2008

Before WILKINSON and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David B. Freedman, CRUMPLER FREEDMAN PARKER & WITT, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Aristeo Melgarejo Lopez pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine. 144 months of imprisonment. He was sentenced to

On appeal, counsel has filed a brief

under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), alleging that there are no meritorious claims on appeal but raising the issue of whether his sentence was reasonable. we affirm. This court reviews the sentence imposed by the district court for reasonableness, applying an abuse of discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007); see United States v. Pauley, a 511 F.3d a 468, 473 (4th Cir. 2007). (1) When For the reasons that follow,

sentencing

defendant,

district

court

must:

properly

calculate the Sentencing Guidelines range; (2) treat the Guidelines as advisory; (3) consider the factors set out in 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2008); and (4) explain its reasons for selecting a sentence. sentence within the Pauley, 511 F.3d at 473. properly calculated We presume that a range is

Guidelines

reasonable.

United States v. Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir.

2007); see Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462-69 (2007) (upholding application of rebuttable presumption of correctness of within-Guidelines sentence).

2

Here,

the

district

court

followed

the

appropriate

procedures and sentenced Lopez within the middle of his advisory sentencing range. Thus, we find no abuse of discretion in its

imposition of the 144-month sentence, and therefore find that Lopez's sentence is reasonable. In accordance with the

requirements of Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. affirm. Accordingly, we

This court requires that counsel inform his client, in

writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further 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 We dispense with oral

copy thereof was served on the client.

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED

3