US v. Ervin Daniels
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ERVIN WASHINGTON DANIELS, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (7:08-cr-00036-D-1)
December 17, 2009
December 23, 2009
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David L. Neal, Hillsborough, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne Margaret Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Ervin written plea Washington to Daniels one pled guilty of pursuant to a
pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2251(a) (West Supp. 2009). On appeal, counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there are no
meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising the following issue: whether the district court imposed an unreasonable sentence by erring as a matter of law in the application of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2G2.1(b)(2)(B) (2008), failing to consider all the 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2009) factors, failing to adequately explain the sentence imposed, and treating the unreasonably high advisory Sentencing Guidelines range as presumptively reasonable. dismiss the appeal of The Government has filed a motion to Daniels' sentence on the grounds of
For the reasons that follow, we dismiss the
appeal of Daniels' sentence and affirm his conviction. We grant the Government's motion to dismiss the appeal of Daniels' sentence. See United States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, The record
496 (4th Cir. 1992) (providing review standard).
reveals that Daniels waived his right to appeal any sentence not in excess of a sentence imposed within the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range and that this waiver was reviewed with Daniels
at his plea hearing, which also revealed that he knowingly and voluntarily Wessells, pled 936 guilty 165, to his offense. (4th Cir. United 1991). States v.
Daniels' 360-month sentence was within his properly-calculated sentencing range; not in excess of the statutory maximum, United States v. General, 278 F.3d 389, 399 n.4 (4th Cir. 2002); not imposed for a constitutionally improper reason, United States v. Marin, 961 F.2d 493, 496 (4th Cir. 1992); and not in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel, United States v. Attar, 38 F.3d 727, 732-33 (4th Cir. 1994); we grant the Government's motion to dismiss the appeal of Daniels' sentence. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. requires Accordingly, we affirm Daniels' conviction. that counsel inform his client, in This court 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 this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
decisional process. DISMISSED IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART
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?