United States v. Adrian Chambers ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-4103
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ADRIAN ANTWON CHAMBERS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:09-cr-01272-RBH-9)
Submitted: September 30, 2011 Decided: October 27, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished
per curiam opinion.
Tynika Adams Claxton, CLAXTON LAW FIRM, Blythewood, South
Carolina, for Appellant. William Norman Nettles, United States
Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina; Carrie Fisher Sherard,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina,
for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Adrian Chambers pled guilty, pursuant to a written
plea agreement, to one count of conspiracy to possess with
intent to distribute 50 grams or more of crack cocaine, 21
U.S.C. § 846 (2006), and was sentenced to 135 months
imprisonment. Chambers noted a timely appeal. Counsel has
filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), asserting that there are no meritorious grounds for
appeal but questioning whether the district court erred in
failing to apply provisions of the Fair Sentencing Act, Pub. L.
No. 111–220, 124 Stat. 2372 (the “FSA”), in determining
Chambers’ sentence. Although advised of his right to file a pro
se supplemental brief, Chambers has not done so.
We have reviewed the transcript of Chambers’ guilty
plea hearing and find that the district court fully complied
with the mandates of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11. The court ensured
that Chambers understood the charge against him and the
potential sentence he faced, the rights he was giving up by
pleading guilty, that he entered his plea knowingly and
voluntarily, and that the plea was supported by a sufficient
factual basis. See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d at 114,
116, 119-20 (4th Cir. 1991). We have also reviewed the entire
record in accordance with Anders and have found no meritorious
issues. We therefore affirm Chambers’ conviction.
2
The Government has filed an unopposed motion to vacate
Chambers’ sentence and remand for resentencing in accordance
with the FSA. In light of the Attorney General’s revised view
on the retroactivity of the FSA, as well as the development of
case law on this point in other jurisdictions, we think it
appropriate, without indicating any view as to the outcome, to
accord the district court an opportunity to consider the matter
in the first instance.
We therefore affirm in part as to Chambers’
conviction, vacate in part, and remand to the district court for
resentencing. This court requires that counsel inform Chambers,
in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the
United States for further review. If Chambers requests that a
petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition
would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for
leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must
state that a copy thereof was served on Chambers. 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 IN PART,
VACATED IN PART,
AND REMANDED
3