United States v. Contreras , 210 F. App'x 254 ( 2006 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 06-4600
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ENRIQUE BARRAGAN CONTRERAS,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Graham C. Mullen, Senior
    District Judge. (3:03-cr-00231-2)
    Submitted: December 14, 2006                Decided:   December 19, 2006
    Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Angela Parrott, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC.,
    Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Kevin Zolot, OFFICE OF
    THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charlotte, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Enrique Barragan Contreras pled guilty to conspiracy to
    possess with intent to distribute 5 kilograms or more of cocaine
    and 100 kilograms or more of marijuana.    He was sentenced to 168
    months in prison.     On appeal, Barragan Contreras’s counsel has
    filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), stating that there were no meritorious issues for appeal
    but raising the question of whether Barragan Contreras’s motion to
    substitute counsel was properly denied.        Barragan Contreras has
    filed a pro se supplemental brief raising the following issues:
    (1) whether the search of his home was proper, (2) whether his
    sentence was properly enhanced for possession of a firearm, and
    (3) whether the district court correctly calculated the amount of
    marijuana attributable to him.    We affirm.
    Regarding the claim raised by counsel, while the court
    initially denied Barragan Contreras’s motion to substitute counsel,
    the court granted the motion when Barragan Contreras renewed it,
    and he was appointed substitute counsel for sentencing.      Barragan
    Contreras does not allege any prejudice, and there is no indication
    in the record that the denial of the first motion hindered his
    defense.   Accordingly, any error was harmless.
    As to the pro se claims, claim one was waived by Barragan
    Contreras’s guilty plea.     Claim two was foreclosed by his plea
    agreement.    Finally, claim three is without merit.    Even removing
    - 2 -
    all marijuana amounts from the calculated drug total would not have
    changed Barragan Contreras’s offense level.     Thus, any error was
    harmless.
    In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
    record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
    appeal. Accordingly, we affirm Barragan Contreras’s conviction and
    sentence.   We deny his motion to extend time to supplment his pro
    se brief.   This court requires that counsel inform her client, in
    writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United
    States for further review.    If the client 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 the client.       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 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 06-4600

Citation Numbers: 210 F. App'x 254

Judges: Michael, Gregory, Shedd

Filed Date: 12/19/2006

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/5/2024