US v. John Henry Walker, No. 07-5017 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-5017 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN HENRY WALKER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:06-cr-00101) Submitted: June 9, 2009 Decided: June 22, 2009 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. M. Timothy Porterfield, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, David A. Brown, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: John Henry Walker pled guilty to making false statements to a financial institution and aiding and abetting (Counts 1-3); tax evasion and aiding and abetting (Counts 4-8); and making false statements to federal agents (Count 9). sentencing hearing, objections to the the district following court overruled enhancements: (1) the At the Walker s tax loss amount of over $400,000, under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual ( USSG ) §§ 2T1.1(a)(1), 2T4.1(H) (2006), resulting in a base offense level of 20; (2) a two-level increase for failing to report more than $10,000 of income from an illegal source, under USSG § 2T1.1(b)(1); and (3) a two-level increase for abusing a position of trust, under USSG § 3C1.1. Walker s resulting total offense level was twenty-four, which, with a criminal history category of I, resulted in a sentencing range of 51-63 months of incarceration. The court imposed a sentence of sixty-three months of incarceration: sixty-three months each for Counts 1-3, and sixty months each for Counts 4-9. All sentences were imposed to run concurrently. On appeal, Walker sentencing enhancements. deferential again contests the above three We review Walker s sentence under a abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v. States, 552 U.S. 38, __, 128 S. Ct. 586, 590 (2007). United We find Walker has alleged no procedural or substantive error in the 2 district court s sentence. Id. at 597; United States v. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473-74 (4th Cir. 2007). Moreover, we find no clear error in the district court s factual findings that the enhancements were supported by a preponderance of the evidence presented at the sentencing hearing. United States v. Allen, 446 F.3d 522, 527 (4th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, we affirm Walker s sentence. with oral adequately argument presented as in the the facts and materials legal before We dispense contentions the court are 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.
