US v. Wanda Martin

Filing 920091001

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4291 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. WANDA Y. MARTIN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:08-cr-00886-MJP-1) Submitted: August 27, 2009 Decided: October 1, 2009 Before NIEMEYER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Parks N. Small, Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. W. Walter Wilkins, United States Attorney, Winston D. Holliday, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Wanda Y. Martin, the sole defendant in a twenty-nine count indictment charging wire fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. 1343 (West Supp. 2009), pled guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement, to count twenty-two. sentenced ordered Martin to twenty-seven in the which amount Martin months' of The district court imprisonment to in and the its restitution $342,991.51 while charitable employ. organization defrauded On appeal, Martin alleges that the district court gave presumptive weight to the advisory guideline sentence range in violation of Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (2007), in rejecting counsel's request to allow Martin to serve her sentence through home detention, a half-way house, or community supervision. The record simply provides no support for the assertion that the court improperly treated the guidelines as presumptively reasonable. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. 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. AFFIRMED 2

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?