US v. Quinton Stevenson


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 7:15-cr-00846-JMC-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000030999].. [16-4496]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-4496 Doc: 22 Filed: 02/27/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-4496 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. QUINTON RASHARD STEVENSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Spartanburg. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (7:15-cr-00846-JMC-1) Submitted: February 23, 2017 Decided: February 27, 2017 Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James B. Loggins, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 16-4496 Doc: 22 Filed: 02/27/2017 Pg: 2 of 3 PER CURIAM: Quinton Rashard Stevenson appeals his within-Guidelines 40month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012). On appeal, Stevenson’s counsel filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that he found no meritorious issues for appeal but questioning the length of Stevenson’s sentence. a supplemental pro se brief claiming that provided ineffective assistance of counsel. Stevenson filed his plea counsel The Government has not responded to the Anders brief or the supplemental pro se brief. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Because the record does not conclusively establish ineffective assistance of counsel, we conclude that those claims should motion. be raised, if at all, in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) See United States v. Benton, 523 F.3d 424, 435 (4th Cir. 2008). We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment. This court requires that counsel inform Stevenson, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. filed, but counsel If Stevenson requests that a petition be believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to 2 Appeal: 16-4496 Doc: 22 Filed: 02/27/2017 withdraw from representation. Pg: 3 of 3 Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Stevenson. 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 3

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?