0% found this document useful (0 votes)
62 views3 pagesUnited States v. Raynard Jenkins, 4th Cir. (2015)
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Raynard Allen Jenkins' conviction and 170-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base, cocaine, and marijuana. Jenkins' attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising potential issues regarding the adequacy of Jenkins' plea hearing and the reasonableness of his sentence. The Court of Appeals found that the plea colloquy substantially complied with Rule 11 requirements and that Jenkins' sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable. The court conducted an independent review and found no grounds for appeal.
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsCopyright
© 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
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
62 views3 pagesUnited States v. Raynard Jenkins, 4th Cir. (2015)
The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Raynard Allen Jenkins' conviction and 170-month sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base, cocaine, and marijuana. Jenkins' attorney filed an Anders brief stating there were no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising potential issues regarding the adequacy of Jenkins' plea hearing and the reasonableness of his sentence. The Court of Appeals found that the plea colloquy substantially complied with Rule 11 requirements and that Jenkins' sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable. The court conducted an independent review and found no grounds for appeal.
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsCopyright
© 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
/ 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4567
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
RAYNARD ALLEN JENKINS, a/k/a Nard, a/k/a Hemi, a/k/a News,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:13-cr-00446-RBH-1)
Submitted:
March 30, 2015
Decided:
April 9, 2015
Before WILKINSON, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Joshua Snow Kendrick, KENDRICK & LEONARD, P.C., Greenville,
South Carolina, for Appellant.
Alfred William Walker Bethea,
Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Raynard Allen Jenkins appeals his conviction and 170-month
sentence imposed by the district court after he pled guilty to
conspiracy
to
possess
with
intent
to
distribute
and
to
distribute 280 grams or more of cocaine base, 500 grams or more
of cocaine, and a quantity of marijuana, all in violation of 21
U.S.C. 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846 (2012).
Jenkins counsel has
filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), stating that he has found no meritorious grounds for
appeal but raising as potential issues the adequacy of the plea
hearing and the reasonableness of Jenkins sentence.
Although
informed of his right to do so, Jenkins has not filed a pro se
supplemental brief.
We affirm.
Having reviewed the transcript of the plea colloquy for
plain error, we conclude that the district court substantially
complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11, and that
the
courts
immigration
failure
consequences
substantial rights.
1121,
States
1126-27
v.
to
of
Jenkins
his
plea
of
did
the
not
potential
affect
his
See Henderson v. United States, 133 S. Ct.
(2013)
Davila,
inform
133
(providing
S.
Ct.
standard);
2139,
standard in guilty plea context).
2147
see
also
(2013)
United
(applying
Our review also leaves us
with no doubt that the district courts imposition of a sentence
of 170 months imprisonment is procedurally and substantively
reasonable.
In
See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007).
accordance
with
Anders,
we
have
reviewed
the
entire
record for any meritorious grounds for appeal and have found
none.
Accordingly, we affirm the district courts judgment.
This court requires that counsel inform Jenkins, in writing, of
his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review.
If Jenkins requests that a petition be filed,
but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous,
counsel
may
move
representation.
in
this
court
for
leave
to
withdraw
from
Counsels motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Jenkins.
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
