US v. Rigoberto Hernandez, No. 08-4225 (4th Cir. 2008)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-4225 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. RIGOBERTO TEJEDA HERNANDEZ, a/k/a Chuckie, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:06-cr-00353-RJC-7) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 22, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Scott Gsell, LAW OFFICE OF SCOTT GSELL, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Rigoberto Tejeda Hernandez pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2006) and was sentenced to 87 months imprisonment. Hernandez s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising one issue but stating that, in his view, there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Although informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, Hernandez has not done so. Counsel questions whether the district court erred in its assessment of a three-level enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3B1.1(c) (2002), for Hernandez s leadership role in the conspiracy. Our review of the record leads us to conclude that the district court did not err in In accordance with Anders, we have applying the enhancement. reviewed the entire record in meritorious issues for appeal. conviction inform Supreme and sentence. Hernandez, Court Hernandez of this This court writing, of the United States that a and have found no We therefore affirm Hernandez s in requests case his requires right to for petition further be filed, that counsel petition the review. If but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for 2 leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Hernandez. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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.
