United States v. Weaver , 235 F. App'x 153 ( 2007 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 07-4208
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    DAVID WEAVER,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.   Terrence W. Boyle,
    District Judge. (5:02-cr-00102-BO)
    Submitted:   July 25, 2007                 Decided:   August 15, 2007
    Before MICHAEL and KING, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois,
    Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Jennifer
    P. May-Parker, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant United States Attorneys,
    Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    David Weaver appeals the district court’s order revoking
    his   supervised    release     and   sentencing   him   to   sixty    months’
    imprisonment.      We affirm.
    We note that while the sentence Weaver received is above
    the advisory sentencing guideline range of eighteen to twenty-four
    months, see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 7B1.4(a) (2006), it
    is within the applicable statutory maximum sentence. Moreover, our
    review of the record leads us to conclude that the district court
    sufficiently considered the statutory factors and explained its
    reasons for imposing a sentence above the advisory guideline range.
    We therefore find that the sentence imposed upon revocation of
    supervised release is not plainly unreasonable.          See United States
    v. Crudup, 
    461 F.3d 433
    , 437, 439-40 (4th Cir. 2006), cert. denied,
    
    127 S. Ct. 1813
     (2007).       We further grant the Government’s motion
    to strike Weaver’s reply brief.           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
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 07-4208

Citation Numbers: 235 F. App'x 153

Judges: King, Michael, Per Curiam, Wilkins

Filed Date: 8/15/2007

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/7/2023