US v. Keith Rivera
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:15-cr-00024-RJC-5 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [16-4450]
Pg: 1 of 4
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 Charlotte.
Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., District Judge. (3:15-cr-00024-RJC-5)
February 24, 2017
Before AGEE and
March 10, 2017
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mark P. Foster, Jr., RAWLS, SCHEER, FOSTER & MINGO, PLLC,
Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Amy Elizabeth Ray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 4
agreement, to possessing with intent to distribute cocaine base,
in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (2012).
Pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Rivera’s
meritorious grounds for appeal.
We affirm the district court’s
We first review the adequacy of the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11
plea, we review the hearing for plain error.
Sanya, 774 F.3d 812, 815 (4th Cir. 2014).
United States v.
Before accepting a
guilty plea, the district court must conduct a plea colloquy in
understands, the rights he is relinquishing by pleading guilty,
11(b)(1); United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116 (4th Cir.
The court also must ensure that the plea was voluntary
and not the result of threats, force, or promises not contained
in the plea agreement, Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(2), and “that
Although we note that there were minor omissions in
Pg: 3 of 4
See United States v. Davila, 133 S. Ct.
substantial rights in Rule 11 context, defendant “must show a
reasonable probability that, but for the error, he would not
have entered the plea” (internal quotation marks omitted)).
Next, we review a defendant’s sentence “under a deferential
38, 41 (2007).
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
Under this standard, a sentence is reviewed for
both procedural and substantive reasonableness.
Id. at 51.
determining procedural reasonableness, we consider whether the
Sentencing Guidelines range, gave the parties an opportunity to
Id. at 49-51.
If a sentence is free of
substantive reasonableness, “tak[ing] into account the totality
of the circumstances.”
Id. at 51.
“Any sentence that is within
or below a properly calculated Guidelines range is presumptively
United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th
Pg: 4 of 4
Our review of the record leads us to conclude that Rivera’s
sentence is procedurally sound.
We further conclude that Rivera
accorded his within-Guidelines sentence.
record in this case and have found no meritorious grounds for
This court requires that counsel inform Rivera, in writing, of
the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
If Rivera requests that a petition be filed,
but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous,
then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from
Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Rivera.
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?