US v. Victor Martinez-Lucio, No. 10-4251 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4251 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. VICTOR HUGO MARTINEZ-LUCIO, a/k/a Victor LNU, a/k/a Victor Martinez, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., Senior District Judge. (6:09-cr-00787-HMH-1) Submitted: October 21, 2010 Decided: November 16, 2010 Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Wallace H. Jordan, Jr., Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. Elizabeth Jean Howard, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Victor Hugo Martinez-Lucio appeals from his conviction and fifty-seven month sentence following his guilty plea to three counts of sale of a firearm to a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. ยงยง 922(d)(1), 924(a)(2) (2006). Martinez-Lucio s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744 (1967), stating that there were no meritorious issues for appeal, but questioning whether the district court complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 in accepting Martinez-Lucio s guilty plea. Martinez-Lucio, advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, did not do so. We affirm. Because Martinez-Lucio did not move in the district court to withdraw his guilty plea, the Rule 11 hearing is reviewed for plain error. United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002). We conclude the district court fully complied with Martinez-Lucio s the guilty Rule 11 plea. requirements During the in plea accepting hearing, in compliance with Rule 11, the district court properly informed Martinez-Lucio of the rights he was forfeiting as a result of his plea and the nature of the charges and penalties he faced, found that Martinez-Lucio was competent and entering his plea voluntarily, and determined there was a sufficient factual basis for the plea. Therefore, the record establishes Martinez-Lucio 2 knowingly and voluntarily entered into his guilty plea with a full understanding of the consequences and there was no error in the district court s acceptance of the plea. As required by Anders, we have reviewed the entire record and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. therefore affirm the district court s judgment. This We court requires that counsel inform Martinez-Lucio, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. filed, but If Martinez-Lucio requests that a petition be counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Martinez-Lucio. oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before We dispense with 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.
