US v. James Matthew Greer

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:15-cr-00405-CCE-2 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999972019].. [16-4277]

Appeal: 16-4277

Doc: 37

Filed: 11/21/2016

Pg: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4277

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JAMES MATTHEW GREER,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
District Judge. (1:15-cr-00405-CCE-2)

Submitted:

November 17, 2016

Decided:

November 21, 2016

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mark E. Edwards, EDWARDS AND TRENKLE, PLLC, Durham, North Carolina,
for Appellant. Kimberly Furr Davis, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES
ATTORNEY, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-4277

Doc: 37

Filed: 11/21/2016

Pg: 2 of 4

PER CURIAM:
James Matthew Greer and a co-defendant robbed a Walgreens
pharmacy

of

controlled

substances.

Greer

pled

guilty

to

interference with commerce by robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§§ 1951 & 2 (2015).

The district court sentenced him to 102

months’ imprisonment.
Anders v.

California,

Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to
386

U.S.

738

(1967),

stating

that,

in

counsel’s view, there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but
questioning

the

propriety

of

the

sentencing

enhancements

for

brandishing a firearm and for physically restraining a person
during the offense.

Greer has filed a pro se supplemental brief,

asserting these same issues.

We affirm.

We review Greer’s sentence for reasonableness, applying “a
deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.”
552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007).

Gall v. United States,

We must first determine whether the

district court committed significant procedural error, such as
incorrect

calculation

of

the

Sentencing

Guidelines

range,

inadequate consideration of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) factors,
or insufficient explanation of the sentence imposed.
States v. Dowell, 771 F.3d 162, 170 (4th Cir. 2014).
no

procedural

reasonableness
circumstances.”

error,
of

the

we

also

sentence

examine

under

Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.

“the

the

United

If we find
substantive

totality

of

the

The sentence imposed must

be “sufficient, but not greater than necessary,” to satisfy the
2

Appeal: 16-4277

Doc: 37

Filed: 11/21/2016

goals of sentencing.
appeal

that

a

Pg: 3 of 4

See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

within-Guidelines

sentence

We presume on

is

substantively

reasonable.

United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th

Cir. 2014).

Greer bears the burden to rebut this presumption “by

showing that the sentence is unreasonable when measured against
the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.”

Id.

Our review of the record reveals that Greer’s sentence is
reasonable.

The

district

court

properly

determined

offense level, including the two challenged enhancements.

Greer’s
During

the commission of the robbery, Greer’s co-defendant brandished a
firearm.

This qualifies Greer for the enhancement, which provides

for a five-level enhancement “if a firearm was brandished or
possessed.”

U.S.

Sentencing

Guidelines

Manual

(“USSG”)

§ 2B3.1(b)(2)(C) (2015).
A

two-level

enhancement

is

imposed

“if

any

person

was

physically restrained to facilitate commission of the offense.”
USSG § 2B3.1(b)(4)(B).

This enhancement was properly applied

based on the fact that the night manager of the store was ordered
to lay face-down on the ground and Greer stood over him and did
not allow him to get up while Greer’s co-defendant directed the
pharmacist to place the narcotics inside a plastic bag.
The court correctly calculated Greer’s Guidelines range as
100-125 months, heard arguments from both parties, considered the
sentencing factors of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), and explained its
3

Appeal: 16-4277

Doc: 37

Filed: 11/21/2016

Pg: 4 of 4

rationale for the sentence it imposed.

We conclude that the court

adequately explained its reasons for the sentence imposed and that
the 102-month sentence is not unreasonable and not an abuse of
discretion.

See United States v. Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th

Cir. 2007) (applying an appellate presumption of reasonableness to
a

sentence

imposed

within

a

properly

calculated

advisory

Guidelines range); see also Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338,
346-56 (2007) (upholding presumption of reasonableness for withinGuidelines sentence).
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
therefore affirm Greer’s conviction and sentence.

We

This court

requires that counsel inform Greer, in writing, of his right to
petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review.
If Greer requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes
that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move
this court for leave to withdraw from representation.

Counsel’s

motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Greer.

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.
AFFIRMED

4