United States v. Bruton ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4333
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JARED BRUTON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, District
Judge. (CR-01-263)
Submitted: February 22, 2006 Decided: March 8, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
David B. Smith, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna
Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Sandra Jane Hairston,
Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jared Bruton appeals the district court’s judgment
entered pursuant to his guilty plea for conspiracy to distribute
cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000), and possession
of a firearm during drug trafficking in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(c) (2000). Bruton’s attorney has filed a brief in accordance
with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying there
are no meritorious issues for appeal, but nonetheless challenging
the court’s calculation of Bruton’s sentence. Bruton filed a
response to the Anders brief, also challenging the enhancement but
also claiming the district court committed sentencing error under
United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). Finding no
reversible error, we affirm.
Bruton claims that the district court improperly
calculated his guideline range when it added two offense levels for
his role in the offense under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§ 3B1.1(c) (2005). Because Bruton failed to raise this claim
below, we must review it for plain error. United States v. Hughes,
401 F.3d 546, 547 (4th Cir. 2005). To receive an adjustment as a
manager or supervisor, a defendant must have managed or supervised
at least one other participant, not just property. See USSG
§ 3B1.1, comment. (n.2); United States v. Capers, 61 F.3d 1100,
1108-09 (4th Cir. 1995).
- 2 -
Bruton and Darius Edwards leased a house from which they
sold two to three kilograms of cocaine base a week. Bruton claims
that he was merely one of equals and did not manage or supervise.
However, Bruton was a supervisor because he hired Lance Pauley to
help run the drug house. The district court properly enhanced and
calculated Bruton’s guideline sentence. As Bruton’s sentence was
within that guideline range, it is presumptively reasonable. See
United States v. Green, __ F.3d __, 2006 WL 267217, *5 (4th Cir.
Feb. 6, 2006).
Pursuant to Anders, we have examined the entire record
and find no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm
Bruton’s conviction 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 -