US v. Pedro Maldonado-Sanchez
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--denying Motion to withdraw/relieve/substitute counsel [999899732-2] Originating case number: 5:14-cr-00072-RLV-DSC-3 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [16-4203]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:14-cr-00072-RLV-DSC-3)
October 13, 2016
October 17, 2016
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
D. Baker McIntyre III, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
possess with intent cocaine and money laundering conspiracy.
appeal, Maldonado-Sanchez’s attorney has filed a brief pursuant
to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that
there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but questioning
advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but
has not filed a brief.
Having carefully reviewed the record, we conclude that the
See United States v. Martinovich, 810 F.3d
States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007), and Maldonado-Sanchez has failed
reasonable, see United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306
(4th Cir. 2014).
Additionally, we have reviewed the guilty plea
colloquy and find that Maldonado-Sanchez’s plea was both knowing
and voluntary, and supported by a sufficient factual basis.
Pg: 3 of 3
defendant does not move to withdraw his guilty plea); Fed. R.
Crim. P. 11.
record in this case and find no meritorious ground for appeal.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment and we deny
counsel’s motion to withdraw.
This court requires that counsel
inform Maldonado-Sanchez, in writing, of the right to petition
the Supreme Court of the United States for further review.
counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then
Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Maldonado-Sanchez.
We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
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?