US v. Corey Cox

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to remand case [998675429-2] Originating case number: 1:10-cr-00274-WO-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998764740]. [11-4557]

Appeal: 11-4557

Document: 26

Date Filed: 01/13/2012

Page: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-4557

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
COREY WENDELL COX,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
William L. Osteen,
Jr., District Judge. (1:10-cr-00274-WO-1)

Submitted:

January 9, 2012

Decided:

January 13, 2012

Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished
per curiam opinion.

Stacey D. Rubain, QUANDER & RUBAIN, P.A., Winston-Salem, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United
States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 11-4557

Document: 26

Date Filed: 01/13/2012

Page: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Corey

Wendell

Cox

appeals

the

240-month

sentence

imposed after he pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute five
kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841,
846

(2006).

On

determination

of

appeal,

his

Cox

asserts
Because

sentence.

error
Cox

only

does

in

not

the

assert

error with regard to his conviction, we affirm the conviction.
The parties have filed a joint motion to remand for
resentencing in light of United States v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237
(4th Cir. 2011) (en banc).

Upon review of the joint motion and

the appellate record, we find the parties’ position to be well
taken.

Accordingly,

we

vacate

Cox’s

sentence

and

grant

the

motion to remand for resentencing.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal
before

contentions
the

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
VACATED IN PART,
AND REMANDED

2