US v. Benjamin Calderon, No. 15-4242 (4th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 15-4242 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. BENJAMIN Nolasco, JULIO AYUSO CALDERON, a/k/a Raul Rafael Vargas- Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:14-cr-00155-NCT-1) Submitted: January 27, 2016 Decided: February 5, 2016 Before MOTZ, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Renorda E. Pryor, HERRING LAW CENTER, PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Terry Michael Meinecke, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Benjamin Julio Ayuso Calderon appeals his conviction and the sentence imposed after he pled guilty to possession of methamphetamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (2012). Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that she has found no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning whether the district court’s decision to impose a Guidelines sentence was reasonable. Calderon was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but has not done so. We review a reasonableness, sentence applying for “an procedural and abuse-of-discretion Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). significant procedural reasonableness of circumstances.” a Id. error, we sentence We presume on “the standard.” Having found no examine under substantive the substantive totality appeal that Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable. a of the within- United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 421 (2014). “by showing that The defendant can rebut that presumption only the sentence is unreasonable against the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors.” Id. when measured Having reviewed the record, we conclude that Calderon has failed to rebut the presumption that his within-Guidelines sentence is reasonable. 2 In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record for any meritorious grounds for appeal and have found none. sentence. writing, Accordingly, we affirm Calderon’s conviction and This court requires that counsel inform Calderon, in of his right to petition United States for further review. the Supreme Court of the If Calderon requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Calderon. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 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.
