US v. Norman Manuel, Jr., No. 12-4530 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4530 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. NORMAN MANUEL, JR., Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:11-cr-00238-WO-1) Submitted: December 10, 2012 Decided: December 27, 2012 Before SHEDD, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Lisa B. Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Norman Manuel, Jr., pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to possession of ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). The district court sentenced Manuel to seventy-two months imprisonment, within his properly calculated Guidelines Manual Guidelines (2011). range. appeal, On See U.S. Manuel Sentencing challenges the substantive reasonableness of the sentence, contending that it is greater than necessary to accomplish the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006). This whether Finding no reversible error, we affirm. court inside, reviews just the outside, under a district or court s significantly deferential sentence, outside Guidelines range[] standard. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007). the abuse-of-discretion When reviewing a sentence for substantive reasonableness, this court examines the totality of sentence is within the applies a presumption substantively reasonable. F.3d 212, rebutted 216-17 only unreasonable United States if when v. (4th the the circumstances, and, if properly-calculated Guidelines on the appeal that the range, sentence is United States v. Mendoza-Mendoza, 597 Cir. 2010). defendant measured shows against Montes-Pineda, Such 445 presumption the sentence the § 3553(a) F.3d 375, 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted). 2 that a 379 is is factors. (4th Cir. After reviewing the record and the parties briefs, we conclude that Manuel s seventy-two-month, within-Guidelines sentence is not substantively unreasonable, as Manuel fails to overcome his the appellate sentence. The presumption district of court reasonableness carefully afforded considered the § 3553(a) factors and showed particular concern that Manuel s prior sentences further had criminal not deterred activity, that him he from had a participating poor history, and that he was a former gang member. in employment Moreover, the court considered the particular needs of Manuel in crafting his sentence, ordering him to participate in substance abuse and mental health counseling and prohibiting him from associating with his former gang. In sum, we conclude that Manuel s carefully crafted sentence was not greater than necessary to accomplish the goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this 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.
