US v. Antonio Minor

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:09-cr-00210-CMH-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998443331] [09-4960]

US v. Antonio Minor

Doc. 0

Case: 09-4960 Document: 49

Date Filed: 10/12/2010

Page: 1

UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4960 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff ­ Appellee, v. ANTONIO A. MINOR, a/k/a Whiteboy, Defendant ­ Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, Senior District Judge. (1:09-cr-00210-CMH-1) Submitted: October 1, 2010 Decided: October 12, 2010

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert L. Jenkins, Jr., BYNUM & JENKINS, PLLC, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Neil H. MacBride, United States Attorney, Edmund P. Power, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Dockets.Justia.com

Case: 09-4960 Document: 49

Date Filed: 10/12/2010

Page: 2

PER CURIAM: Antonio agreement, to one A. Minor of pleaded guilty, to without receive, a plea

count

conspiracy

possess,

conceal, barter, sell and dispose of motor vehicles that crossed a state boundary, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 (2006), and one count of interstate receipt, possession and sale of a stolen motor vehicle, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2313 (2006). district court calculated Minor's advisory Guidelines The range

under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual ("USSG") (2008) to be eighty-four of to 105 months' months' imprisonment imprisonment. its and imposed a

sentence appeals

eighty-four

Minor

timely

his

sentence, We affirm. review the

challenging

substantive

reasonableness. We

district

court's

sentence

for

reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). consideration of both the Id.

Gall v.

This review requires and substantive

procedural

reasonableness of a sentence. four-month prison sentence as

Minor challenges the eightyunreasonable, but

substantively

concedes its procedural reasonableness. In reasonable, determining we "take whether into a sentence the is substantively of the

account

totality

circumstances."

Gall, 552 U.S. at 51; United States v. Pauley, This court presumes that a

511 F.3d 468, 473 (4th Cir. 2007). 2

Case: 09-4960 Document: 49

Date Filed: 10/12/2010

Page: 3

sentence within a properly determined advisory Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. See United States v. Abu Ali,

529 F.3d 210, 261 (4th Cir. 2008). Minor argues that his sentence is substantively

unreasonable because the sentence he received was greater than those of his co-conspirators. sentences ignore "the need Minor asserts that the disparate to avoid unwarranted sentence

disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found (2006). guilty of similar conduct." 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(6)

However, Minor's sentence differed from those of his because his more extensive criminal history

co-conspirators

yielded a higher Guidelines range. We conclude that Minor has not rebutted the

presumption of reasonableness that we apply to a sentence within the properly calculated Guidelines range. 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

3