US v. Kevin Davis
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. KEVIN LYNDELL DAVIS, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:07-cr-01177-RBH-1)
July 21, 2009
August 25, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William F. Nettles, IV, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. Alfred William Walker Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Pursuant to a written plea agreement, Kevin Lyndell Davis pled guilty to Hobbs Act robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a)
The plea agreement specified that a six-year sentence
was appropriate; this provision was binding upon the district court upon acceptance of the plea agreement. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(c)(1)(C). Davis accordingly was sentenced to six years in prison. pursuant He to now appeals. v. His attorney 386 has U.S. was filed 738 a brief
(1967), and his
sentence reasonable, but stating that there are no grounds for appeal. Davis was notified of his right to file a pro se
supplemental brief but has not filed such a brief. Our review of the transcript of the
We affirm. plea colloquy
discloses full compliance with Rule 11.
Furthermore, the record
reveals that Davis entered his plea voluntarily and knowingly and that there was a factual basis for the plea. conclude that the six-year sentence is reasonable. We have reviewed the entire record in accordance with Anders appeal. and have not identified any meritorious issues for Finally, we
Accordingly, we affirm.
This court requires counsel to
inform his client, in writing, 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 2
that such a petition would be frivolous, counsel may move in this court to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion
must state that a copy of the motion was served on the client. 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.
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?