UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. Christopher James ALLEN, Defendant - Appellant.
Decided: February 13, 2019
Before WILKINSON and FLOYD, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.
Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, John A. Duberstein, Assistant Federal Public Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. JoAnna Gibson McFadden, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
In accordance with a written plea agreement, Christopher James Allen pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012), and was sentenced to 34 months in prison. Allen 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 district court erred in imposing sentence but concluding that there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Allen 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 Allen’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 on Allen’s lengthy criminal history and the need to protect the public. The court also was concerned that Allen had tested positive for drugs while on pretrial release. Allen’s within-Guidelines sentence is presumptively reasonable, and Allen 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 Allen’s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Allen, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Allen 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 Allen. We deny the motion for appointment of new counsel and 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.