United States v. McKoy , 210 F. App'x 323 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4340
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JOHN GREGORY MCKOY, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Spartanburg. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District
Judge. (7:05-cr-253-HMH)
Submitted: December 14, 2006 Decided: December 19, 2006
Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Bradley Bennett, SALVINI & BENNETT, LLC, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Regan Alexandra Pendleton, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
John Gregory McKoy, Jr., appeals his sentence imposed for
possession with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of cocaine
and cocaine base and possession of a firearm in relation to a drug
trafficking offense after pleading guilty. Counsel has filed an
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), brief and McKoy has not
filed a pro se supplemental brief. The Government elected not to
file a reply brief. Counsel raises issues of whether McKoy’s
sentence was reasonable. We affirm.
This court reviews the imposition of a sentence for
reasonableness. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 260-61
(2005); United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540, 546-47 (4th Cir.
2005). After Booker, courts must calculate the appropriate
guideline range, making any appropriate factual findings. United
States v. Davenport, 445 F.3d 366, 370 (4th Cir. 2006). The court
then should consider the resulting advisory guideline range in
conjunction with the factors under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000
& Supp. 2006), and determine an appropriate sentence. Davenport,
445 F.3d at 370. A sentence imposed within the properly calculated
guideline range is presumptively reasonable. United States v.
Green, 436 F.3d 449, 457 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 2309(2006). Because the district court adequately explained the basis
for its sentencing decision, taking into consideration McKoy’s
arguments, we conclude that the resulting 180-month sentence was
- 2 -
reasonable. See United States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 380
(4th Cir. 2006), petition for cert. filed, ___ U.S.L.W. ___ (U.S.
July 21, 2006) (No. 06-5439); Green, 436 F.3d at 457.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal. We therefore affirm McKoy’s convictions and sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform his 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 -