United States v. Eric Hellams, JR., 4th Cir. (2012)
United States v. Eric Hellams, JR., 4th Cir. (2012)
United States v. Eric Hellams, JR., 4th Cir. (2012)
No. 11-5008
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Alexander Williams, Jr., District
Judge. (8:10-cr-00303-AW-1; 8:10-cr-00304-AW-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Eric Hellams, Jr., pled guilty, pursuant to a plea
agreement, to conspiracy to commit mail fraud, in violation of
18 U.S.C. 1349 (2006), conspiracy to distribute and possess
with
intent
to
distribute
100
grams
or
more
of
heroin,
in
386
U.S.
meritorious
issues
738
for
(1967),
appeal,
stating
but
that
there
questioning
are
whether
no
the
rights
in
Hellams
plea
agreement.
We
grant
the
defendant
may
waive
the
right
to
appeal
if
that
F.3d 137, 151 (4th Cir. 2005); United States v. General, 278
F.3d 389, 400-01 (4th Cir. 2002).
We
therefore
dismissal,
and
grant
the
dismiss
Governments
the
appeal
motion
of
for
Hellams
conviction. *
Hellams retained his right to appeal any sentence of
over
seventy-eight
months
imprisonment.
Therefore,
we
may
Hellams
quantity
attributable
to
him
for
sentencing
purposes.
USSG
2D1.1.
We
review
this
issue
for
clear
quantity
by
converting
cash
to
its
drug
equivalent
based
on
err
in
calculating
drug
quantity
by
converting
cash
drug seizure or the amount seized does not reflect the scale of
the offense, the court shall approximate the quantity of the
controlled
substance;
[i]n
making
this
determination,
the
of
drug
quantity.
United
States
v.
properly
cash
amounts
linked
A district court
credibly
to
the
narcotics themselves.
592 (4th Cir. 1998).
The
attributable
evidence.
2002).
Government
to
must
defendant
prove
by
the
drug
preponderance
quantity
of
the
other circuits and held that a district court need not err,
on the side of caution or otherwise when approximating drug
quantity;
rather,
it
must
only
determine
that
it
was
more
likely than not that the defendant was responsible for at least
the drug quantity attributed to him.
Hellams
equivalency.
possession
upon
his
arrest
into
its
drug
court did not err by converting the seized money into its drug
equivalency for sentencing purposes under USSG 2D1.1.
5
of
the
appeal
waiver.
We
therefore
affirm
Hellams
This Court
If
Hellams
requests
that
petition
be
filed,
but
may
move
representation.
in
this
Court
for
leave
to
withdraw
from
before
the
Court
and
argument
would
not
aid
the
decisional process.
DISMISSED IN PART;
AFFIRMED IN PART