US v. Dwayne Anderson, No. 09-4809 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4809 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DWAYNE ANDERSON, a/k/a Dewayne Anderson, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg. Irene M. Keeley, District Judge. (1:06-cr-00020-IMK-8) Submitted: October 22, 2010 Decided: December 6, 2010 Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. John J. Pizzuti, MCCAMIC, SACCO, PIZZUTI & MCCOID, PLLC, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellant. Betsy C. Jividen, Acting United States Attorney, Zelda E. Wesley, Assistant United States Attorney, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dwayne imprisonment Anderson after a was jury sentenced him found to of guilty 292 months conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and distribute in excess of fifty grams of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 (2006) cocaine (Count and One), aiding and and distribution abetting, in of 1.73 violation of grams 21 § 841(a)(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 (2006) (Count Thirteen). filed a timely appeal, challenging evidence supporting the convictions. concluded that sufficient the 841, of U.S.C. Anderson sufficiency of the In our prior decision, we evidence supported Anderson s conviction on Count Thirteen, but not as to Count One. We affirmed Anderson s conviction on Count Thirteen, reversed his conviction on Count One, and remanded. United States v. Anderson, 282 F. App x 255 (4th Cir. 2008) (No. 07-4303). On from the remand, earlier the district sentencing court proceeding adopted its regarding findings Anderson s relevant conduct and criminal history and sentenced Anderson to 188 months imprisonment. Anderson again appeals, contending that the district court made numerous errors in his resentencing including failing to order a new Presentence Report and using acquitted conduct in determining his relevant conduct abused its discretion by denying his recusal motion. 2 and We have thoroughly examined the Anderson s contentions to be without merit. affirm his sentence. facts and materials legal before record and find Accordingly, we We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately the and argument court presented would not in the 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.
