US v. Davy Wyatt, No. 09-4003 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4003 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVY CHRISTOPHER WYATT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:07-cr-00322-NCT-1) Submitted: June 12, 2009 Decided: July 2, 2009 Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas N. Cochran, Assistant Greensboro, North Carolina, for Miller, Assistant United States Carolina, for Appellee. Federal Public Defender, Appellant. Angela Hewlett Attorney, Greensboro, North Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Davy written plea Christopher agreement Wyatt to pled guilty distribution of violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2006). sentenced Wyatt imprisonment. as a Counsel career filed a cocaine to base, a in The district court offender brief pursuant to pursuant 262 to months Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), in which he asserts there are no meritorious issues for appeal but states that sentence is unreasonable because it is unduly harsh. Wyatt s Wyatt was notified of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but he did not do so. Finding no error, we affirm. When determining a sentence, the district court must calculate the appropriate advisory Guidelines range and consider it in conjunction § 3553(a) (2006). with of a factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, __, 128 S. Ct. 586, 596 (2007). imposition the Appellate review of a district court s sentence, whether inside, just outside, or significantly outside the Guidelines range, is for abuse of discretion. Id. at 591. Sentences within the applicable Guidelines range may be presumed by the appellate court to be reasonable. United States v. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473 (4th Cir. 2007). The district court followed the necessary procedural steps in sentencing Wyatt, appropriately treating the Guidelines 2 as advisory, properly calculating and considering the applicable Guidelines factors. range, the and discussing the applicable § 3553(a) Furthermore, Wyatt s sentence, which is the low end of advisory Guidelines range and well below the applicable statutory maximum, see 21 U.S.C.A. § 841(b)(1)(B) (West 1999 & Supp. 2009) (prescribing maximum of life imprisonment for offenses involving five grams or more of cocaine base and a prior felony drug conviction), may be presumed reasonable by this court. Thus, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing the chosen sentence. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. We requires that deny counsel s counsel inform motion his to withdraw. client, in This writing, court of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further filed, review. but frivolous, If counsel then the client believes counsel may withdraw from representation. requests that move such this that a a petition petition court for be would be leave to Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 3 presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid in the decisional process. AFFIRMED 4
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.
