US v. Stacy Jone

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:14-cr-00080-1. Copies to all parties and the district court. [999668084]. [15-4112]

Appeal: 15-4112

Doc: 26

Filed: 09/29/2015

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-4112

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
STACY ERWIN JONES,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston.
Thomas E. Johnston,
District Judge. (2:14-cr-00080-1)

Submitted:

September 18, 2015

Before WILKINSON and
Senior Circuit Judge.

KEENAN,

Decided:

Circuit

September 29, 2015

Judges,

and

HAMILTON,

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory J. Campbell, CAMPBELL LAW OFFICE, Charleston, West
Virginia, for Appellant.
R. Booth Goodwin II, United States
Attorney, Joshua C. Hanks, Assistant United States Attorney,
Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-4112

Doc: 26

Filed: 09/29/2015

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Stacy

Erwin

Jones

appeals

the

district

court’s

judgment

sentencing him to 30 months in prison and 3 years of supervised
release after the jury convicted him of aiding and abetting the
distribution of heroin.

In the district court, Jones objected

to the probation officer’s calculation of his relevant conduct,
but his attorney withdrew the objection in an agreement with the
Government resulting in a lower Guidelines range.
raises

the

accepting

issue

defense

determining

his

of

whether

counsel’s
relevant

the

district

withdrawal

conduct

of

between defense counsel and the Government.

court

his

pursuant

On appeal, he

to

erred

objections
the

in
and

agreement

We affirm.

Jones did not challenge the district court’s acceptance of
counsel’s withdrawal in the district court.
issue for plain error.
547 (4th Cir. 2015).

We thus review this

See United States v. Obey, 790 F.3d 545,
Jones “must show that an error occurred,

that it was plain, and that it affected his substantial rights.”
Id. (citation omitted).

Even if he makes this showing, “we will

correct the error only if it seriously affect[s] the fairness,
integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.”
(citation

and

internal

quotation

marks

omitted).

We

Id.
have

reviewed the record and Jones’ brief, and we conclude that he
fails to show plain error affecting his substantial rights.

2

Appeal: 15-4112

Doc: 26

Filed: 09/29/2015

Pg: 3 of 3

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

3