US v. William Satterwhite
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 0:12-cr-00332-CMC-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999284510].. [13-4599]
Appeal: 13-4599
Doc: 20
Filed: 01/27/2014
Pg: 1 of 5
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-4599
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
WILLIAM ISOM SATTERWHITE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Rock Hill.
Cameron McGowan Currie, Senior
District Judge. (0:12-cr-00332-CMC-1)
Submitted:
January 23, 2014
Decided:
January 27, 2014
Before WILKINSON and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joshua Snow Kendrick, KENDRICK & LEONARD, P.C., Greenville,
South Carolina, for Appellant. Nancy Chastain Wicker, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 13-4599
Doc: 20
Filed: 01/27/2014
Pg: 2 of 5
PER CURIAM:
William
Isom
Satterwhite
appeals
his
conviction
and
the 180-month sentence imposed after he pled guilty, pursuant to
a plea agreement, to one count of possession of a firearm after
having been convicted of a crime punishable by more than one
year of imprisonment, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2012).
On
appeal,
counsel
filed
a
brief
pursuant
to
Anders
v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he states that there
are no meritorious issues for appeal, but questions whether the
district court complied with Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure
11 in accepting Satterwhite’s guilty plea, whether Satterwhite
was properly classified as an armed career criminal, and whether
the
sentence
is
reasonable.
Satterwhite
was
advised
of
his
right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not filed
one.
The Government declined to file a brief.
We affirm.
Because Satterwhite did not move in the district court
to withdraw his guilty plea, we review the guilty plea hearing
for plain error.
United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517, 525
(4th Cir. 2002).
“To establish plain error, [Satterwhite] must
show that an error occurred, that the error was plain, and that
the error affected his substantial rights.”
Muhammad,
Satterwhite
478
F.3d
satisfies
247,
these
249
(4th
Cir.
requirements,
United States v.
2007).
“correction
Even
if
of
the
error remains within [the court’s] discretion, which [the court]
2
Appeal: 13-4599
Doc: 20
Filed: 01/27/2014
Pg: 3 of 5
should not exercise . . . unless the error seriously affect[s]
the
fairness,
proceedings.”
omitted).
the
integrity
Id.
or
public
(internal
reputation
quotation
marks
of
judicial
and
citation
Our review of the record leads us to conclude that
district
court
Satterwhite’s
guilty
complied
plea,
with
which
Rule
was
11
entered
in
accepting
knowingly
and
procedural
and
voluntarily.
This
substantive
standard.
court
reviews
reasonableness
a
sentence
under
an
for
abuse
of
discretion
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
evaluating
procedural
reasonableness,
this
court
In
considers
whether the district court properly calculated the defendant’s
advisory Guidelines range, gave the parties an opportunity to
argue
for
an
appropriate
sentence,
considered
the
18
U.S.C.
§ 3553(a) (2012) factors, selected a sentence supported by the
record, and sufficiently explained the selected sentence.
552 U.S. at 49-51.
Gall,
If the sentence is free of procedural error,
the court reviews it for substantive reasonableness, taking into
account the totality of the circumstances.
51.
This court presumes that a sentence within or below a
properly
calculated
reasonable.
2012).
Gall, 552 U.S. at
Guidelines
range
is
substantively
United States v. Susi, 674 F.3d 278, 289 (4th Cir.
Moreover,
a
statutorily
3
required
sentence
is
per
se
Appeal: 13-4599
Doc: 20
reasonable.
Filed: 01/27/2014
Pg: 4 of 5
United States v. Farrior, 535 F.3d 210, 224 (4th
Cir. 2008).
A defendant is subject to an enhanced sentence as an
armed career criminal when he violates 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and
has three prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug
offenses.
18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) (2012).
A violent felony is a
conviction punishable by more than one year of imprisonment for
a crime that “(i) has as an element the use, attempted use, or
threatened use of physical force against the person of another;
or
(2)
is
burglary,
explosives,
or
arson,
otherwise
serious
potential
U.S.C.
§ 924(e)(2)(B).
investigation
risk
report
of
or
extortion,
involves
physical
In
conduct
injury
this
included
involves
that
to
case,
three
prior
use
presents
another.”
the
of
a
18
presentence
convictions
of
burglary in South Carolina and one conviction for strong-arm
robbery
in
felonies.
Florida
as
predicate
convictions
for
violent
We have previously held that convictions under South
Carolina’s burglary statute are violent felonies under § 924(e).
United States v. Wright, 594 F.3d 259, 266 (4th Cir. 2010).
Thus, Satterwhite was correctly classified as an armed career
criminal.
We
conclude
that
the
sentence
is
procedurally
reasonable.
The sentence is also substantively reasonable, as the
district court could not have imposed less than the statutory
4
Appeal: 13-4599
Doc: 20
Filed: 01/27/2014
Pg: 5 of 5
mandatory minimum sentence, which is also within the properly
calculated
Guidelines
F.3d
862
850,
(4th
range.
Cir.
United
2005)
States v.
(absent
Robinson,
government
motion
404
for
departure for substantial assistance under § 3553(e), district
court has no discretion to sentence below statutory minimum).
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal.
We
therefore
affirm
Satterwhite’s
conviction
and
sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform Satterwhite,
in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the
United States for further review.
If Satterwhite requests that
a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition
would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for
leave to withdraw from representation.
Counsel’s motion must
state that a copy thereof was served on Satterwhite.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal
before
contentions
this
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
5
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?