US v. Terry Headen

Filing 920090918

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-4878

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TERRY HEADEN, Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Bluefield. David A. Faber, Senior District Judge. (1:07-cr-00139-1)

Submitted:

August 26, 2009

Decided:

September 18, 2009

Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

David O. Schles, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID SCHLES, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Miller Bushong, Assistant United States Attorney, Beckley, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM: Terry Headen appeals the district court's judgment

imposing concurrent sentences of 240 months' imprisonment after Headen pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute oxycodone in

violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2006) and conspiracy to commit money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956 (West 2006 & Supp. 2008). We find the district court did not err in imposing a four-level increase in the total offense level as to the money laundering conviction under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual

§ 3B1.1(a) (2008) for Headen's leadership role.

We find that

the district court appropriately considered the advisory nature of the guidelines range and the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006), independently calculated a sentencing range, and imposed a reasonable sentence. 552 U.S. 38, 128 S. Ct. 586, 596 See Gall v. United States, (2007); United States v.

Carter, 564 F.3d 325, 329 (4th Cir. 2009); United States v. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473 (4th Cir. 2007). err by declining to depart downward after Nor did the court recognizing its

authority to do so. 682 (4th Cir.

See United States v. Quinn, 369 F.3d 666, Accordingly, we affirm the district

2004).

court's judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 2 presented in the materials

before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process. AFFIRMED

3