United States v. Paul Coleman , 490 F. App'x 609 ( 2012 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-5218
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
PAUL BERNARD COLEMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-5313
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
PAUL BERNARD COLEMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
On Remand from the Supreme Court of the United States.
(S. Ct. No. 11-9604)
Submitted: November 26, 2012 Decided: December 5, 2012
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished
per curiam opinion.
Craig W. Sampson, Sr., BARNES & DIEHL, PC, Chesterfield,
Virginia, for Appellant. Neil H. MacBride, United States
Attorney, N. George Metcalf, Richard D. Cooke, Assistant United
States Attorneys, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2
PER CURIAM:
A federal jury convicted Paul Bernard Coleman of two
counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base
(“crack”), in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a) (2006). On
December 20, 2010, the district court sentenced Coleman to the
statutory mandatory minimum term of life imprisonment. On
appeal, this court affirmed the district court’s judgment. See
United States v. Coleman, 445 F. App’x 642 (4th Cir. 2011)
(unpublished).
Subsequently, in Dorsey v. United States, 567 U.S.
___, 132 S. Ct. 2321 (2012), the Supreme Court determined that
the Fair Sentencing Act (“FSA”) applies to defendants who
committed their offenses prior to the effective date of the Act,
August 3, 2010, but were sentenced after that date. Id. at
2326-36. The Court then granted Coleman’s petition for a writ
of certiorari and remanded the appeal to this court based on
Dorsey. As Coleman was sentenced after the effective date of
the FSA, we affirm the conviction but vacate the sentence and
remand to the district court for resentencing in light of
Dorsey. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the
3
materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART,
VACATED IN PART,
AND REMANDED
4