Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 57 views

    United States v. Victor Engle, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Victor Engle's sentence of 200 months in prison for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. The court rejected Engle's arguments that he should not have been classified as a career offender or received a sentencing enhancement for possession of firearms. The court found that Engle met the criteria for classification as a career offender based on his guilty plea. It also determined that Engle did not demonstrate plain error regarding the firearms enhancement because he did not object to the facts in the pre-sentence report.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Victor Engle, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    57 views3 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Victor Engle's sentence of 200 months in prison for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. The court rejected Engle's arguments that he should not have been classified as a career offender or received a sentencing enhancement for possession of firearms. The court found that Engle met the criteria for classification as a career offender based on his guilty plea. It also determined that Engle did not demonstrate plain error regarding the firearms enhancement because he did not object to the facts in the pre-sentence report.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-09-23 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 98-4454

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Victor Engle's sentence of 200 months in prison for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. The court rejected Engle's arguments that he should not have been classified as a career offender or received a sentencing enhancement for possession of firearms. The court found that Engle met the criteria for classification as a career offender based on his guilty plea. It also determined that Engle did not demonstrate plain error regarding the firearms enhancement because he did not object to the facts in the pre-sentence report.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    57 views3 pages

    United States v. Victor Engle, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Victor Engle's sentence of 200 months in prison for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. The court rejected Engle's arguments that he should not have been classified as a career offender or received a sentencing enhancement for possession of firearms. The court found that Engle met the criteria for classification as a career offender based on his guilty plea. It also determined that Engle did not demonstrate plain error regarding the firearms enhancement because he did not object to the facts in the pre-sentence report.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.

    No. 98-4454

    VICTOR TYRONE ENGLE,


    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham.
    James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge.
    (CR-97-255)
    Submitted: July 27, 1999
    Decided: September 23, 1999
    Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    _________________________________________________________________
    COUNSEL
    Thomas H. Johnson, Jr., GRAY, NEWELL & JOHNSON, L.L.P.,
    Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Walter C. Holton, Jr.,
    United States Attorney, Sandra J. Hairston, Assistant United States
    Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).

    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Victor Tyrone Engle was indicted by a federal grand jury and
    charged with two counts of an eighteen count superseding indictment.
    Count one charged Engle with conspiracy in violation of 21 U.S.C.A.
    846 (West Supp. 1999). Count eighteen charged Engle with possession with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C.
    841(a)(1) (1994). Engle pled guilty to count eighteen in accordance
    with a written plea agreement. At sentencing, the court increased
    Engle's offense level by two levels because police officers found
    three weapons at his residence at the time of his arrest. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual 2D1.1(b)(1) (1997). The court also sentenced Engle as a career offender. See USSG 4B1.1. Engle now
    appeals his sentence of 200 months' imprisonment.
    Engle's attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v.
    California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), addressing whether Engle should
    have been classified as a career offender. Engle contends that the
    prior convictions forming the basis for his career offender classification should not have been counted against him because if he had pled
    guilty to the conspiracy charge in count one of the indictment, the
    prior convictions would have been counted as relevant conduct and
    Engle would not have been sentenced as a career offender. This argument is without merit. Engle did not plead guilty to count one, but to
    count eighteen. Based upon that plea, Engle met the criteria identified
    by USSG 4B1.1 for sentencing as a career offender. Furthermore,
    Engle's contention is irrelevant and speculative. Therefore, the district
    court did not err in sentencing Engle as a career offender.
    Engle's pro se supplemental brief argues that his offense level
    should not have been increased for possession of firearms. Engle
    states that the increase was improper because the firearms at issue
    were not found at his residence, as stated in the presentence report
    (PSR), but were discovered by police in a field, separate and apart
    from where the cocaine was located. Engle did not raise this point at
    the plea proceeding or sentencing and did not object to the facts stated
    in the PSR. We find that Engle did not demonstrate plain error by the
    district court on this sentencing issue. See Fed. R. Crim. P. 52.
    2

    In accordance with Anders, we have examined the entire record in


    this case and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm Engle's
    sentence. We deny counsel's motion to withdraw at this time. 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. See 4th Cir. R. 46(d).
    Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. See id. 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

    You might also like