United States v. Jose Vazquez , 508 F. App'x 236 ( 2013 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4194
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
JOSE GALVIN VAZQUEZ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:11-cr-00248-TDS-1)
Submitted: December 20, 2012 Decided: January 31, 2013
Before KING, DIAZ, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Louis C. Allen III, Federal Public Defender, Mireille P. Clough,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Winston-Salem, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Randall Stuart Galyon, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Jose Galvin Vazquez appeals the nineteen-month
sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of a
firearm as an illegal alien, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 922(g)(5) (2006). 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 imposed a substantively unreasonable
sentence. Vazquez was notified of his right to file a pro se
supplemental brief but has not done so. We affirm. *
We review a sentence imposed by a district court for
reasonableness. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 46, 51
(2007). We must first ensure that the district court committed
no “significant procedural error,” including improper
calculation of the Guidelines range, insufficient consideration
of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006) factors, and inadequate
explanation of the sentence imposed. Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. If
the sentence is procedurally reasonable, we must examine the
substantive reasonableness of the sentence under the totality of
*
We placed this appeal in abeyance pending our decision in
United States v. Carpio-Leon, __ F.3d __, 2012 WL 6217606 (4th
Cir. Dec. 14, 2012) (No. 11-5063) (rejecting Second and Fifth
Amendment challenges to § 922(g)(5)). We have reviewed
Carpio-Leon and conclude that it provides no potentially
meritorious challenge to Vazquez’s conviction.
2
the circumstances. Id. We have carefully reviewed the record
and conclude that Vazquez’s sentence is free of significant
procedural error. We further conclude that Vazquez cannot rebut
the presumption of reasonableness accorded his within-Guidelines
sentence. See United States v. Lynn, 592 F.3d 572, 575-76 (4th
Cir. 2010); United States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 379
(4th Cir. 2006).
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment. This court
requires that counsel inform Vazquez, in writing, of the right
to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further
review. If Vazquez 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 Vazquez.
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
3