US v. Kenneth Hunter

Filing 920090330

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-4460

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KENNETH RAY HUNTER, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert E. Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (2:05-cr-00049-REM-1)

Submitted:

January 26, 2009

Decided:

March 30, 2009

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Matthew A. Victor, VICTOR, VICTOR & HELGOE, LLP, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Sharon L. Potter, United States Attorney, Stephen D. Warner, Assistant United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Kenneth Ray Hunter pled guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement of to one count 500 of aiding of and abetting the in

distribution

more

than

grams

methamphetamine,

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A) (2006), and was sentenced arguing affirm. We applying States, an 128 a review abuse S. Ct. a of criminal discretion 594-97 court sentence for reasonableness, Gall When v. United a to 210 months is in prison. Hunter timely no appealed, error, we

his

sentence

unreasonable.

Finding

standard. (2007).

586,

sentencing calculate

defendant,

district

must

properly

the

guidelines range, determine whether a sentence within that range serves the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006), and explain its reasons for selecting a sentence. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473 (4th Cir 2007). we may presume a sentence within the United States v.

On appellate review, properly calculated

guidelines range is reasonable.

Id.; see Rita v. United States,

551 U.S. 338, __, 127 S. Ct. 2456, 2462-69 (2007) (upholding appellate presumption of reasonableness for a within-guidelines sentence). Hunter his sentence, challenges asserting his the substantive under the reasonableness totality of of the In

that, was 2

circumstances,

sentence

inordinately

lengthy.

support of this argument, he argues that the district court gave too little weight to § 3553(a) considerations such as his

rehabilitation, support from his family and community, and his health, and placed undue weight on deterrence and the need to protect the public. However, a review of the sentencing

transcript and the presentence report ("PSR") reveals no error in sentencing. While a district court must explain its sentence, it need not robotically tick through § 3553(a)'s every subsection. United 2006). States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 380 (4th Cir.

Here, the court explained that Hunter had a "lengthy and

troubling criminal history" that covered twenty pages in the PSR and spanned twenty years. offense of collecting a The court also found that the instant drug debt had potential for serious

violence.

Moreover, the court explained that previous periods

of incarceration had not deterred Hunter from criminal conduct. The court found that based upon the seriousness of the crime and the need to protect the public and deter further criminal

conduct, a variance from the guidelines range was not warranted. The district court properly calculated the guidelines range, provided rebut considered ample the appropriate for its his § 3553(a) factors, does and not

reasoning

sentence. properly

Hunter

the

presumption

that

calculated,

within-

guidelines sentence is reasonable. 3

Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. 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. AFFIRMED

4