US v. James Jones

Filing 920090122

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-4720 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JAMES ALBERT JONES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for District of South Carolina, at Anderson. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (8:06-cr-01264-HMH-1) Submitted: January 15, 2009 Decided: January 22, 2009 Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge. SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mario A. Pacella, STROM Carolina, for Appellant. United States Attorney, Appellee. LAW FIRM, L.L.C., Columbia, South Maxwell B. Cauthen, III, Assistant Greenville, South Carolina, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James firearm by a Albert Jones pled guilty in to possession of 18 of a convicted felon, violation U.S.C. 922(g)(1), 924(e) (2006). minimum of 180 months' He was sentenced to the mandatory and a five-year term of imprisonment supervised release. * Jones' counsel has filed an appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that, in his opinion, there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but raising the issue of whether Jones entered his guilty plea knowingly and voluntarily. Jones specifically challenges the district court's failure to vacate the plea when Jones stated at sentencing that he did not understand his mandatory minimum sentence. The Government declined to file a brief. supplemental brief. Jones has filed a pro se Finding no error, we affirm. In the absence of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea, we review the adequacy of the guilty plea pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 for plain error. F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002). United States v. Martinez, 277 A review of the transcript of Jones' guilty plea hearing reveals that the district court fully complied with the requirements of Rule 11. Jones' plea was The district court granted Jones' 28 U.S.C. 2255 (2006) motion raising a claim under United States v. Peak, 992 F.2d 39, 42 (4th Cir. 1993), and reinstated judgment for purposes of allowing Jones to file an appeal. * 2 knowingly, knowledge voluntarily, of the and intelligently attendant to made, his with full plea. consequences guilty Specifically, we find the district court informed Jones of the statutory mandatory minimum sentence he faced and Jones acknowledged that he understood. error. We therefore find no plain We further find no merit to Jones' claim in his pro se supplemental brief. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Jones' conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Jones, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Jones 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 the are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the was served on Jones. facts and legal before contentions the court materials would 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?