United States v. Antonio Hall ( 2011 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 10-4657
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ANTONIO LATRE HALL, a/k/a Tony Bone,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:09-cr-00054-FDW-1)
Submitted: September 13, 2011 Decided: October 17, 2011
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed in part; vacated and remanded in part by unpublished
per curiam opinion.
Daniel K. Dorsey, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Amy
Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Antonio Latre Hall pled guilty to possession with
intent to distribute at least five grams of cocaine base, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) (2006). Prior to
the plea hearing, the Government filed an information pursuant
to 21 U.S.C. § 851 (2006), notifying Hall of its intent to seek
enhanced penalties based on two prior felony drug convictions.
The district court rejected Hall’s request for a variant
sentence and imposed a within-guidelines sentence of 268 months
of imprisonment. Hall appealed.
Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), noting no meritorious issues
for appeal, but questioning whether any errors occurred during
Hall’s plea hearing and sentencing. Hall has filed a pro se
supplemental brief raising several issues. We have reviewed the
record and conclude that the district court substantially
complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and
ensured that Hall’s plea was knowing and voluntary and supported
by a sufficient factual basis. Consequently, we affirm Hall’s
conviction.
We vacate Hall’s sentence, however, and remand for
further proceedings in light of our recent en banc decision in
United States v. Simmons, F.3d , 2011 WL 3607266 (4th Cir.
2
Aug. 17, 2011). * The present record is not sufficient to allow a
determination of whether, after Simmons, Hall’s prior conviction
qualified as a felony drug offender for purposes of an enhanced
statutory penalty under 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b), 851. We leave this
determination to the district court on remand.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no other meritorious issues
for appeal. We therefore affirm Hall’s conviction and vacate
his sentence and remand to the district court for further
proceedings consistent with this opinion. This court requires
that counsel inform Hall, in writing, of the right to petition
the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If
Hall 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
Hall. 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 AND REMANDED IN PART
*
Although we vacate Hall’s sentence on account of Simmons,
we have considered and find without merit the remaining issues
raised by Hall in his pro se supplemental brief.
3