United States v. Shakeam Bernabela , 675 F. App'x 333 ( 2017 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 16-4497
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    SHAKEAM DYRELL BERNABELA, a/k/a King B,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.     Robert J. Conrad,
    Jr., District Judge. (3:13-cr-00263-RJC-DCK-16)
    Submitted:   January 31, 2017             Decided:   February 2, 2017
    Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Laura E. Beaver, BEAVER LAW FIRM, Raleigh, North Carolina, 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    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
    Shakeam Dyrell Bernabela pled guilty pursuant to a plea
    agreement         to    one    count   each    of       conspiracy        to   distribute      and
    possess with the intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base,
    in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(A), (B), 846 (2012), and
    he was sentenced to 151 months in prison.                                 Bernabela’s counsel
    has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 
    386 U.S. 738
    (1967), suggesting that Bernabela’s plea was unknowing
    and    involuntary            and   that     his       sentence      is    unreasonable,       but
    explaining why those arguments lack merit.                                 Bernabela has not
    filed a pro se supplemental brief, despite receiving notice of
    his right to do so, and the Government has declined to file a
    responsive brief.              We affirm.
    We       reject       Bernabela’s      suggestion            that      his    plea      was
    unknowing         and     involuntary.         The          magistrate      judge,     to    whose
    jurisdiction Bernabela consented, complied with Fed. R. Crim. P.
    11 in conducting Bernabela’s plea hearing, and we discern no
    basis      for     questioning         the    knowing         and    voluntary        basis    for
    Bernabela’s            guilty       plea.              We    thus     affirm         Bernabela’s
    convictions.
    Because Bernabela did not object to his career offender
    status in the district court, we review this issue for plain
    error.       See United States v. Olano, 
    507 U.S. 725
    , 731-32 (1993).
    To    be     a   career       offender,      Bernabela        must    have     been    at     least
    2
    eighteen          years    old    at    the    time    of    the    instant     offense     of
    conviction, the instant offense must be a felony that is a crime
    of violence or a controlled substance offense, and Bernabela
    must have at least two prior felony convictions that are either
    crimes of violence or controlled substance offenses.                                See U.S.
    Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4B1.1.                        Our review of the record
    confirms that Bernabela was properly adjudged a career offender
    based        on    his     prior        convictions        for     controlled       substance
    offenses.
    In    accordance         with    Anders,      we    have   reviewed     the    entire
    record and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.                                     We
    therefore         affirm    Bernabela’s        convictions         and   sentence.         This
    court requires that counsel inform Bernabela, in writing, of the
    right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
    further review.            If Bernabela 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 Bernabela.                 We dispense with oral argument because
    the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
    materials         before    this       court   and    argument       would    not    aid   the
    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-4497

Citation Numbers: 675 F. App'x 333

Judges: Wilkinson, Keenan, Thacker

Filed Date: 2/2/2017

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024