US v. Anthony Pace, No. 09-4581 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4581 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ANTHONY LAMONTE PACE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:08-cr-00401-JAB-2) Submitted: December 4, 2009 Decided: December 16, 2009 Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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, Michael A. DeFranco, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Anthony Lamonte Pace pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to one count of distribution of cocaine hydrochloride, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (2006), and convicted to one felon, count in 924(a)(2) (2006). of possession violation of 18 of a firearm U.S.C. §§ by a 922(g)(1), Following a jury trial, Pace was convicted of one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) (2006); he was sentenced to a total of 128 months imprisonment. Pace appeals his sentence, alleging that it is substantively unreasonable because it is greater than necessary to further the goals of the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006) sentencing factors. We affirm. This court applying an abuse of States, 552 U.S. 38, reviews a sentence discretion 49-51 for standard. (2007). This reasonableness, Gall review v. United requires appellate consideration of both the procedural and substantive reasonableness of a sentence. the substantive Id. reasonableness of Because Pace challenges only his sentence, we need consider whether his sentence is procedurally reasonable. not See Edwards v. City of Goldsboro, 178 F.3d 231, 241 n.6 (4th Cir. 1999) (holding that a party who fails to assert claims in the 2 argument section of its opening brief is deemed to have abandoned those claims). This court reviews the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, taking into account the totality of the circumstances, including the extent of any variance from the [g]uidelines range. United States v. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473 (4th Cir. 2007) (quoting Gall, 552 U.S. at 51). This court accords guidelines range a an States v. sentence appellate Abu Ali, within the properly presumption 528 F.3d of 210, denied, 129 S. Ct. 1312 (2009). calculated reasonableness. 261 (4th Cir. United 2008), cert. We have thoroughly reviewed the record and find that Pace has failed to rebut that presumption. See United States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 379 (4th Cir. 2006) (stating presumption may be rebutted by showing sentence is unreasonable when measured against the § 3553(a) factors). We thus find the sentence reasonable. We dispense affirm with oral the judgment argument of the because district the facts court. and We 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.
