United States v. Pearson ( 1996 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 95-5298
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    CHARLES A. PEARSON,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
    Judge. (CR-94-576)
    Submitted:   March 21, 1996                 Decided:   April 2, 1996
    Before NIEMEYER and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    John A. O'Leary, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Sean
    Kittrell, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    See Local Rule 36(c).
    PER CURIAM:
    After a thorough Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing, Charles Pearson
    pled guilty to armed bank robbery, 
    18 U.S.C. § 2113
    (a), (d) (1988),
    possession of a firearm as a convicted felon, 
    18 U.S.C.A. §§ 922
    (g), 924(e) (West Supp. 1995), and carrying a firearm in
    relation to a crime of violence, 
    18 U.S.C.A. § 924
    (c) (West Supp.
    1995). Based on his three prior convictions for violent felonies,
    Appellant was sentenced as armed career criminal under § 924(e) and
    USSG § 4B1.4.1 He received concurrent sentences of 327 months2 on
    the armed robbery and felon-in-possession counts, and a five year
    consecutive sentence for his conviction under § 924(c). His attor-
    ney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
     (1967), raising one issue but stating that, in his view,
    there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. Appellant has not
    filed a supplemental brief although he was advised of his right to
    do so. Finding no error, we affirm.
    In the Anders brief, Pearson's attorney questions the district
    court's imposition of a consecutive sentence on the § 924(c) count.
    However, this consecutive sentence is required by statute. 18
    1
    United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual (Nov.
    1995).
    2
    Because his instant offenses involved the use of a firearm
    during a bank robbery, Appellant's offense level was thirty-four
    and his criminal history category was VI. See USSG § 4B1.4(b)(3),
    (c)(2). The applicable guidelines range for his armed robbery and
    felon-in-possession counts, therefore, was 262 to 327 months. USSG
    Ch.5, Pt.A.
    
    2 U.S.C.A. § 924
    (c). The district court had no choice but to impose
    a consecutive sentence.
    In accordance with Anders, we have examined the entire record
    in this case and find no meritorious issues for appeal. We there-
    fore affirm the conviction and the sentence imposed. 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, counsel
    may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation.
    Counsel's 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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 95-5298

Filed Date: 4/2/1996

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021