US v. Derrick Green

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:09-cr-00092-H-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998482911] [10-4045]

Download PDF
US v. Derrick Green Doc. 0 Case: 10-4045 Document: 32 Date Filed: 12/10/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4045 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. DERRICK CHARLES GREEN, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (5:09-cr-00092-H-1) Submitted: November 5, 2010 Decided: December 10, 2010 Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Dockets.Justia.com Case: 10-4045 Document: 32 Date Filed: 12/10/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Derrick Charles Green appeals the sixty-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of fifty grams or more of cocaine base with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1) (2006). the district to court procedurally its On appeal, Green contends that erred to in sentencing the him by failing recognize authority disparity. reject crack-toconcurs. powder-cocaine sentencing The Government After carefully reviewing the record, we agree that the court procedurally further erred, vacate in Green's of sentence, Spears v. and remand for proceedings light United States, 129 S. Ct. 840, 843-44 (2009) ("[D]istrict courts are entitled to reject and based We vary on categorically a policy with from the crack-cocaine with those the Guidelines disagreement oral argument Guidelines."). dispense because issues are adequately presented before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. VACATED AND REMANDED 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?