Scribd
Upload
51 views3 pages

United States v. Banks, 4th Cir. (2009)

This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Jermaine Donnell Banks pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. He was sentenced to 192 months in prison by the district court. Banks' counsel argued there were no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioned if the sentence was reasonable. The appeals court reviewed the sentence and determined the district court properly calculated the guidelines range and considered the sentencing factors. The appeals court found the sentence to be reasonable and affirmed the district court's judgment.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
51 views3 pages

United States v. Banks, 4th Cir. (2009)

This document summarizes a court case from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Jermaine Donnell Banks pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine. He was sentenced to 192 months in prison by the district court. Banks' counsel argued there were no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioned if the sentence was reasonable. The appeals court reviewed the sentence and determined the district court properly calculated the guidelines range and considered the sentencing factors. The appeals court found the sentence to be reasonable and affirmed the district court's judgment.

Uploaded by

Scribd Government Docs
Copyright
© Public Domain
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-4301

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JERMAINE DONNELL BANKS,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Bluefield.
David A. Faber,
District Judge. (1:07-cr-00157-1)

Submitted:

March 31, 2009

Decided:

April 10, 2009

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Gregory J. Campbell, CAMPBELL LAW OFFICES, Charleston, West


Virginia, for Appellant. Miller A. Bushong, III, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Beckley, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Jermaine Donnell Banks
pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute five grams
or more of cocaine base (crack), in violation of 21 U.S.C.
841(a)(1) (2006).
months in prison.

The district court sentenced Banks to 192


Banks counsel has filed a brief pursuant to

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that, in his


view,

there

are

no

meritorious

grounds

for

appeal.

Counsel

questions whether the sentence imposed by the district court is


reasonable.

Banks was advised of his right to file a pro se

supplemental brief, but he did not file one.


We review the sentence imposed by the district court
for an abuse of discretion.
586, 597 (2007).

Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct.

Our review of the record leads us to conclude

that the district court followed the necessary procedural steps


in

sentencing

Banks,

properly

calculating

the

advisory

guidelines range and considering that range in conjunction with


the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) (2006).

Id.

We

also find that the district court meaningfully articulated its


refusal to vary from the guidelines range and to sentence Banks
near the bottom of the range.
sentence is reasonable.

Id.

Thus, we conclude that the

See United States v. Go, 517 F.3d 216,

218 (4th Cir. 2008) (applying presumption of reasonableness to


within-guidelines sentence).
2

In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire


record

for

Accordingly,

any
we

meritorious
affirm

the

issues

district

and

have

courts

found

none.

judgment.

This

court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of


his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further
filed,

review.
but

If

counsel

the

client

believes

requests

that

such

that
a

petition

petition

would

be
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

You might also like