US v. Mandrell Davi
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:14-cr-00433-JAB-6. Copies to all parties and the district court. . [16-4427]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
MANDRELL EDWARD DAVIS, a/k/a Dro,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Senior District Judge. (1:14-cr-00433-JAB-6)
December 15, 2016
December 19, 2016
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael E. Archenbronn, Winston Salem, North Carolina, for
Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States
Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Mandrell Edward Davis appeals the district court’s judgment
revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to 12 months’
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there
are no meritorious issues for appeal but questioning whether
advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but he
has not filed one.
sentence upon revocation of supervised release.
We will affirm
a revocation sentence if it is within the statutory maximum and
is not plainly unreasonable.”
United States v. Webb, 738 F.3d
638, 640 (4th Cir. 2013) (internal quotation marks omitted).
unreasonable, we must first determine whether it is unreasonable
United States v. Thompson, 595 F.3d 544, 546 (4th Cir.
A sentence is substantively reasonable if the district
court states a proper basis for concluding the defendant should
United States v. Crudup, 461 F.3d 433, 440 (4th Cir. 2006).
Chapter 7 of the Sentencing Guidelines is presumed reasonable.
Pg: 3 of 3
Webb, 738 F.3d at 642; see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§ 7B1.4 (2014).
Applying these standards, we conclude that Davis’ withinrange
Further, in accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
This court requires that counsel inform Davis, in writing, of
the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
If Davis requests that a petition be filed, but
counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then
Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Davis.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
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?