Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 7 views

    United States v. Hairston, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Charles Hairston pled guilty to distribution of crack cocaine and was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) The appellate court found that Hairston's guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered and that the district court properly calculated and considered the sentencing guidelines and factors. 3) The appellate court also found Hairston's sentence, which was within the recommended guidelines range, to be reasonable. The conviction and sentence were therefore affirmed.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Hairston, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    7 views3 pages
    1) Charles Hairston pled guilty to distribution of crack cocaine and was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) The appellate court found that Hairston's guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered and that the district court properly calculated and considered the sentencing guidelines and factors. 3) The appellate court also found Hairston's sentence, which was within the recommended guidelines range, to be reasonable. The conviction and sentence were therefore affirmed.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2007-10-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 07-4232

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1) Charles Hairston pled guilty to distribution of crack cocaine and was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) The appellate court found that Hairston's guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered and that the district court properly calculated and considered the sentencing guidelines and factors. 3) The appellate court also found Hairston's sentence, which was within the recommended guidelines range, to be reasonable. The conviction and sentence were therefore affirmed.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    7 views3 pages

    United States v. Hairston, 4th Cir. (2007)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    1) Charles Hairston pled guilty to distribution of crack cocaine and was sentenced to 120 months in prison. 2) The appellate court found that Hairston's guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered and that the district court properly calculated and considered the sentencing guidelines and factors. 3) The appellate court also found Hairston's sentence, which was within the recommended guidelines range, to be reasonable. The conviction and sentence were therefore affirmed.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    You are on page 1of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 07-4232

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHARLES LAMONT HAIRSTON,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,
    District Judge. (1:06-cr-00307-NCT)

    Submitted:

    October 18, 2007

    Decided:

    October 23, 2007

    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    John Carlyle Sherrill, III, SHERILL & CAMERON, PLLC, Salisbury,


    North Carolina, for Appellant. Randall Stuart Galyon, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Charles Lamont Hairston appeals from his conviction and
    120-month

    sentence

    imposed

    following

    distribution of crack cocaine.

    his

    guilty

    plea

    to

    Hairstons attorney filed a brief

    pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that


    there were no meritorious issues for appeal, but challenging the
    reasonableness of the sentence.

    Hairston was advised of his right

    to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has declined to do so.


    Our

    review

    of

    the

    record

    discloses

    no

    reversible

    error;

    accordingly, we affirm Hairstons conviction and sentence.


    We find that Hairstons guilty plea was knowingly and
    voluntarily entered after a thorough hearing pursuant to Fed. R.
    Crim. P. 11.

    Hairston was properly advised of his rights, the

    elements of the offense charged, and the mandatory minimum and the
    maximum sentence for the offense.

    The court also determined that

    there was an independent factual basis for the plea and that the
    plea was not coerced or influenced by any promises.

    See United

    States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 119-20 (4th Cir. 1991).

    We

    therefore find that the plea was valid.


    We find that the district court properly applied the
    Sentencing

    Guidelines

    and

    considered

    the

    relevant

    factors before imposing the 120-month sentence.

    sentencing
    18 U.S.C.A.

    3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2007); see United States v. Hughes,
    401 F.3d 540, 546-47 (4th Cir. 2005).

    - 2 -

    Additionally, we find that

    the sentence imposedwhich was within the properly calculated


    guideline rangewas reasonable.

    See United States v. Green, 436

    F.3d 449, 457 (4th Cir.) ([A] sentence imposed within the properly
    calculated [g]uidelines range . . . is presumptively reasonable.)
    (internal quotation marks and citation omitted), cert. denied, 126
    S. Ct. 2309 (2006); see also Rita v. United States, 127 S. Ct.
    2456,

    2462-69

    presumption

    of

    (2007)

    (upholding

    correctness

    of

    application

    of

    rebuttable

    within-guideline

    sentence).

    Accordingly, we affirm Hairstons sentence.


    As required by Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
    and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
    affirm Hairstons conviction and sentence.

    We therefore

    This court requires

    that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his right to


    petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review.
    If the client 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.
    Counsels motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the
    client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    - 3 -

    You might also like