US v. Wheeler, No. 07-4572 (4th Cir. 2007)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4572 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus TONY ZAQUECE WHEELER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Senior, Senior District Judge. (1:06-cr-00323-WLO) Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 18, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louis C. Allen III, Federal Public Defender, William S. Trivette, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Randall S. Galyon, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Zaquece Wheeler was convicted by a jury of five counts of distribution of crack cocaine. He was sentenced to the statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 240 months in prison. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions and the reasonableness of his sentence. We affirm. We will not reverse a conviction on the grounds of insufficiency of the evidence unless the prosecution has clearly failed to present evidence supporting a defendant s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Jones, 735 F.2d 785, 791 (4th Cir. 1984). conclusion of the See United States v. Here, Wheeler contends that the testimony of two eye witnesses that he distributed crack on five separate convictions in occasions the was absence insufficient of to fingerprints support and his further corroboration, especially given the background of a cooperating witness. However, the uncorroborated testimony of one witness may be sufficient to sustain a conviction. 115 F.3d 1185, 1190 (4th Cir. 1997). Unites States v. Wilson, In addition, while Wheeler questions the reliability of the witnesses testimony, we will not reexamine credibility findings. See United States v. Saunders, 886 F.2d 56, 60 (4th Cir. 1989). Accordingly, we find that sufficient evidence supported Wheeler s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. With regard to Wheeler s sentence, the district court lacked the authority to sentence Wheeler below the statutory - 2 - mandatory minimum sentence. See United States v. Allen, 450 F.3d 565, 568-69 (4th Cir. 2006). Thus, Wheeler s sentence, which was within reasonable the reasonable. presumptively guideline range, was See United States v. Moreland, 437 F.3d 424, 433 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 2054 (2006) (standard of review). Accordingly, sentence. we affirm Wheeler s convictions and 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 -
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
