US v. Samuel Vinci, Jr.

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:15-cr-00041-RLV-DCK-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999939819].. [16-4087]

Appeal: 16-4087

Doc: 23

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4087

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SAMUEL HENRY VINCI, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:15-cr-00041-RLV-DCK-1)

Submitted:

September 29, 2016

Decided:

October 3, 2016

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Leslie Carter Rawls, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-4087

Doc: 23

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Samuel Henry Vinci, Jr., pled guilty, pursuant to a written
plea agreement, to enticement of a minor to engage in sexual
activity,

in

violation

of

18

U.S.C.

§ 2422(b)

(2012).

The

district court sentenced Vinci to 235 months’ imprisonment, a
sentence at the bottom of the applicable Sentencing Guidelines
range.

Counsel

California,

386

has
U.S.

filed
738

a

brief

(1967),

meritorious grounds for appeal.

pursuant

stating

to

that

Anders

there

v.

are

no

Although notified of his right

to do so, Vinci has not filed a pro se brief.
In

accordance

with

Anders,

we

have

reviewed

the

entire

record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal.
court

Before

accepting

conducted

a

Vinci’s

thorough

plea

guilty

plea,

colloquy,

the

district

satisfying

the

requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and ensuring that Vinci’s
plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by an independent
factual basis.
(4th

Cir.

See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116

1991).

We

discern

no

procedural

error

in

the

sentencing process, see Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51
(2007), and Vinci does not rebut our appellate presumption that
his within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable, see
United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir. 2014).
We therefore affirm Vinci’s conviction and sentence.

This

court requires that counsel inform Vinci, in writing, of the
2

Appeal: 16-4087

Doc: 23

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review.

If Vinci requests that a petition be filed, but

counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then
counsel

may

move

representation.

in

this

court

for

leave

to

withdraw

from

Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof

was served on Vinci. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts

and

materials

legal
before

contentions

are

adequately

this

and

argument

court

presented

would

not

in

the

aid

the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3