UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Quinton Tyrell LESTER, Defendant-Appellant.
Decided: December 18, 2018
Before KING and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, Kathleen A. Gleason, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Kelley Patricia Kennedy Gates, Special Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
In accordance with a written plea agreement, Quinton Tyrell Lester pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012), and was sentenced to 78 months in prison. Lester appeals. His attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), questioning whether the sentence is reasonable but stating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Lester was advised of his right to file a pro se brief but has not filed such a brief. We affirm.
The district court properly calculated Lester’s Guidelines range, considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) sentencing factors and the arguments of the parties, and provided a sufficiently individualized assessment based on the facts of the case. In imposing sentence, the court remarked that Lester, armed with a loaded handgun, returned to a business from which he had stolen the previous day. Additionally, Lester attempted to flee from officers who were called to the scene. Lester’s within-Guidelines sentence is presumptively reasonable, and Lester failed to rebut the presumption. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007); United States v. Carter, 564 F.3d 325, 330 (4th Cir. 2009).
Pursuant to Anders, we have reviewed the entire record and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm Lester’s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Lester, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Lester 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 Lester. 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 by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Was this helpful?
Response sent, thank you
Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.