United States v. Hall

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
NOV 27 1998
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 97-7125
v. (D.C. No. 97-CR-25-S)
JIMMY DALE HALL, JR., a/k/a Bo (E. D. Okla.)
Hall,
Defendant - Appellant.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before ANDERSON, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.
After examining Defendant-Appellant’s brief and the appellate record, this
panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist
the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9.
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.
On May 28, 1997, pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant pled guilty to
one count of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. Because
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
Defendant was not present for his sentencing on September 17, 1997, a warrant
was issued for his arrest. After Defendant’s arrest, he was sentenced on
October 29, 1997. The sentencing court found that Defendant had not accepted
responsibility for his criminal conduct despite his guilty plea because he had
failed to withdraw from criminal conduct while awaiting sentencing. This
determination was supported by evidence that Defendant possessed narcotics,
firearms, and $19,000 cash upon his second arrest. See R., Doc. 14 at 2-3. The
court also found that he had obstructed justice during the prosecution of the case
because he willfully failed to appear for sentencing. Consequently, the court
increased Defendant’s offense level by five levels and sentenced him to 240
months imprisonment and sixty months supervised release.
Although Defendant filed a notice of appeal to appeal the conviction and
sentence, Defendant’s counsel moved this court to withdraw as counsel because
he believed an appeal was frivolous. In accordance with this court’s order to file
a brief referring to all matters in the record that might arguably support an appeal
pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), counsel filed a one-
page brief stating that there are no matters in the record to raise on appeal and
that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Having carefully considered the record on
-2-
appeal and counsel’s filings, we affirm Defendant’s conviction and sentence and
grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
AFFIRMED.
Entered for the Court
Monroe G. McKay
Circuit Judge
-3-