US v. Frank Snyder, No. 12-4351 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4351 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. FRANK DAMON SNYDER, a/k/a Frank Damon Snider, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District Judge. (8:03-cr-00194-DKC-5) Submitted: December 3, 2012 Before MOTZ and Circuit Judge. KING, Circuit Decided: Judges, and December 14, 2012 HAMILTON, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Elita C. Virginia, Assistant Appellee. Amato, LAW OFFICE OF ELITA C. AMATO, Arlington, for Appellant. Deborah A. Johnston, Chan Park, United States Attorneys, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Frank Damon Snyder was convicted by a jury in 2004 of conspiracy to distribute powder cocaine, cocaine base (crack), and PCP, and imprisonment. was initially sentenced to 360 months Snyder appealed his conviction and sentence. We affirmed his conviction, but vacated the sentence and remanded for resentencing in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). On remand, the district court reimposed the 360- month sentence. Snyder again appealed his sentence; however, before appellate briefs were filed, he moved for a remand and resentencing in light of Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85, 108 (2007). While Snyder was We granted a limited remand for this purpose. awaiting resentencing, the district court reduced his sentence to 324 months on its own motion pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). For reasons that are not clear from the record, Snyder was not resentenced until April 2012, when the district court rejected his attempt offense level to and challenge criminal the history determination category, relitigation of those issues barred by the mandate rule. States v. Bell, 5 F.3d 64, 66 (4th Cir. 1993). of his finding United In recognition of Snyder s rehabilitative conduct while incarcerated and the remaining disparity in sentencing for crack offenses, the district court varied below the Guidelines range and imposed a 2 sentence of 300 months. The court declined to impose a lower sentence because of the large quantities of drugs involved in the offense and stated that it would impose the same sentence even if Snyder were in criminal history category III rather than category IV. Snyder now appeals his 300-month sentence. Snyder s attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that, in her opinion, there are no meritorious district issues court for appeal, but unconstitutionally questioning considered whether certain the facts, misapplied the Sentencing Guidelines, or failed to comply with 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006). Snyder was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but did not file one. We review a discretion standard. (2007). ensure sentence under a deferential abuse-of- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 The first step in this review requires the court to that the district court committed no significant procedural error, such as improperly calculating the Guidelines range, failing to consider the § 3553(a) factors, or failing to adequately explain the sentence. F.3d 325, 328 (4th Cir. 2009). United States v. Carter, 564 If the sentence is procedurally reasonable, we consider the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, taking into account the totality of the circumstances. Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. A sentence within or below a properly 3 calculated Guidelines range is substantively reasonable. States v. Susi, 674 F.3d 278, 289 (4th Cir. 2012). United We have reviewed the record and conclude that Snyder s sentence is both procedurally and substantively reasonable. In accordance with Anders, having reviewed the entire record in this case and having found no meritorious issues for appeal, we affirm the sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Snyder, in writing, of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Snyder requests that a petition be filed, but 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 Snyder. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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.
