US v. Alexis Villalta-Morale
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:15-cr-00121-RJC-DSC-36. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. . Mailed to: Alexis Villalta-Morales # 30106-058 F.C.I. Edgefield PO Box 725 Edgefield, SC 29824. [16-4596]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
ALEXIS VILLALTA-MORALES, a/k/a Rikichi,
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-00121-RJC-DSC-36)
February 23, 2017
February 27, 2017
Before SHEDD and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James S. Weidner, Jr., LAW OFFICE OF JAMES S. WEIDNER, JR.
ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth
Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Alexis Villalta-Morales pled guilty, pursuant to a written
plea agreement, to conspiracy to participate in a racketeering
enterprise, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1962(d), 1963(a) (2012), attempted murder
in aid of a racketeering enterprise, 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5) (2012),
and using, carrying, or possessing a firearm in relation to a crime
of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2012).
The district court
Guidelines range to 204 months’ imprisonment.
In accordance with
counsel has filed a brief certifying there are no meritorious
sentence is reasonable.
Villalta-Morales has filed a pro se
We affirm the district court’s judgment.
deferential abuse-of-discretion standard.”
Gall v. United States,
reasonableness of the sentence.
Id. at 51.
procedural reasonableness, we consider whether the district court
properly calculated the defendant’s advisory Sentencing Guidelines
range, gave the parties an opportunity to argue for an appropriate
sentence, considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) factors, and
sufficiently explained the selected sentence.
Gall, 552 U.S. at
Pg: 3 of 3
If there are no procedural errors, we then consider the
substantive reasonableness of a sentence, evaluating “the totality
of the circumstances.”
Id. at 51.
A sentence is presumptively
reasonable if it is within or below the Guidelines range, and this
“presumption can only be rebutted by showing that the sentence is
United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir.
In this case, the record establishes that Villalta-Morales’
accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this
case and Villalta-Morales’ pro se supplemental brief and have found
district court’s judgment. This court requires that counsel inform
Villalta-Morales, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme
Court of the United States for further review. If Villalta-Morales
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 representation.
Counsel’s motion must
state that a copy thereof was served on Villalta-Morales.
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?