US v. Joe Jefferson

Filing 920091210

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-4940 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOE LEWIS JEFFERSON, a/k/a Stink, a/k/a Louis Jefferson, a/k/a Joe Little, a/k/a Jo Jo, a/k/a Joseph Wayne Jefferson, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (4:07-cr-00023-D-1; 5:07-cr-00197-D) Submitted: November 23, 2009 Decided: December 10, 2009 Before WILKINSON and Senior Circuit Judge. MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark E. Edwards, EDWARDS & TRENKLE, PLLC, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Following his guilty plea to identity fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1028(a)(7) (2006), and possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), to 156 a 924 (2006), Joe Lewis on the Jefferson identity was fraud on the sentenced conviction months' imprisonment 120 and concurrent months' imprisonment firearm and ammunition count. arguing that the district Jefferson appeals his sentence, court erred when it imposed a departure sentence that was too extensive. affirm. Although factual Jefferson of not the claim does not Finding no error, we dispute court's the legal or at was correctness and in does district that findings court sentencing unjustified the district relevant departing under the guidelines provisions, Jefferson does assert that his sentence is "only 24 months less than the maximum" and that it is excessive in light of his guilty plea, acceptance of responsibility, and efforts to cooperate with authorities. analysis of the reasons The district court provided ample it believed Jefferson's departure sentence was warranted, not only during Jefferson's sentencing hearing, but also in a detailed sentencing memorandum. the extent of effect Jefferson's of his criminal prior 2 more history, lenient the Given negligible the deterrent sentences, increasingly serious and extensive nature of Jefferson's offenses, and the district court's meaningful articulation of the reasons for its departure and the extent of the departure, we find that the extent of Jefferson's departure sentence was reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 50-51 (2007); United States v. Hernandez-Villanueva, 473 F.3d 118, 123 (4th Cir. 2007). Based on the foregoing, we affirm the district court's judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are and adequately argument presented not in aid the the materials decisional would 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?