US v. Franklin S. Jones, No. 07-4218 (4th Cir. 2008)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4218 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus FRANKLIN SHURON JONES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Elizabeth City. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (2:05-cr-00029-FL) Submitted: December 19, 2007 Decided: January 4, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Franklin Shuron Jones appeals the sentence of 188 months imposed pursuant to his guilty plea to three drug offenses. We affirm. After United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), a sentencing court must calculate the appropriate guideline range, consider that range in conjunction with the factors set forth at 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2006), and impose sentence. United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540, 546-47 (4th Cir. 2005). We review a post-Booker sentence to determine whether it is within the statutorily prescribed range and reasonable. Id. at 547. [A] sentence within the proper advisory guidelines range is presumptively reasonable. United States v. Johnson, 445 F.3d 339, 341 (4th Cir. 2006). review legal When conducting a reasonableness inquiry, we questions, including the interpretation of the guidelines, de novo, while factual findings are reviewed for clear error. United States v. Moreland, 437 F.3d 424, 433 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 2054 (2006). Jones first contends that his sentence is unreasonable because he was erroneously found to be a career offender. Our review of the record satisfies us that he met the criteria for career offender status. § 4B1.1(a) (2005). See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual Jones was over eighteen when he committed the instant controlled substance offenses, and he had at least two - 2 - prior felony convictions for a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense. The fact that the majority of Jones prior offenses were for misdemeanors is irrelevant. Jones adequately contrary, also take the argues his that upbringing district court the district court into consideration. listened carefully to did not To the defense counsel s description of the circumstances in which Jones was raised, and described the situation as tragic. In imposing sentence, the court considered a number of factors, including Jones background, his extensive criminal history, other § 3553(a) factors, and the presentence report, which the court adopted. We conclude that the arguments raised on appeal are without merit and that Jones sentence, which falls within the properly calculated advisory guideline range, is reasonable. accordingly affirm. facts and materials legal before 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.
