US v. Gerard Loui

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:09-cr-00902-SB-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998624925].. [10-4779]

Appeal: 10-4779

Document: 42

Date Filed: 07/05/2011

Page: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 10-4779

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GERARD RONALD LOUIS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston.
Solomon Blatt, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (2:09-cr-00902-SB-1)

Submitted:

June 30, 2011

Decided:

July 5, 2011

Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John M. Ervin, III, Darlington, South Carolina, for Appellant.
William N. Nettles, United States Attorney, Matthew J. Modica,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 10-4779

Document: 42

Date Filed: 07/05/2011

Page: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Gerard

Ronald

Louis

pled

guilty

to

possession

with

intent to distribute a quantity of marijuana and five grams or
more of cocaine base and possession with intent to distribute a
quantity

of

cocaine,

in

violation

of

21

U.S.C.

§ 841(a)(1)

(2006).

Because the attributable drug quantity included five

grams or more of cocaine base, and Louis had a prior felony drug
conviction, the district court sentenced him to the statutory
mandatory

minimum

of

120

months’

imprisonment.

Finding

no

error, we affirm.
On appeal, Louis contends that the Fair Sentencing Act
of 2010 (FSA), Pub. L. No. 111-220, 124 Stat. 2372 (reducing the
sentencing disparity between cocaine and cocaine base), should
be applied to him.

Although Louis has standing to challenge the

sentencing statute, his argument is foreclosed by this court’s
recent decision in United States v. Bullard, __ F.3d __, 2011 WL
1718894, at *9-*11 (4th Cir. May 6, 2011) (holding that FSA does
not apply retroactively).

Since Louis was sentenced on July 13,

2010, prior to the enactment of the FSA on August 3, 2010, the
FSA

does

not

apply

to

him,

and

he

is

not

entitled

to

resentencing.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district
court.
legal

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions

are

adequately
2

presented

in

the

materials

Appeal: 10-4779

Document: 42

Date Filed: 07/05/2011

Page: 3 of 3

before the court and argument would not aid in the decisional
process.

AFFIRMED

3