US v. John Myer, No. 10-4443 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4443 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOHN ROBERT MYERS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge. (4:08-cr-01072-RBH-6) Submitted: December 21, 2010 Decided: January 14, 2011 Before DUNCAN, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Russell W. Mace, III, THE MACE FIRM, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for Appellant. Arthur Bradley Parham, Rose Mary Sheppard Parham, Assistant United States Attorneys, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Appellant John Robert Myers pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute fifty or more grams of cocaine base and five kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1),(b)(1)(A) (2006). The Myers to 120 months imprisonment. district court sentenced Myers timely appealed. Myers attorney has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, adequacy of Myers hearing; whether 386 U.S. Federal Myers 738 Rule of knowingly (1967), and questioning Criminal Procedure voluntarily waived the 11 his appellate rights; and whether Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines applies to this case. Myers received notice of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but did not do so. Because we find no meritorious grounds for appeal, we affirm. First, Myers adequately advised him relatedly, whether his knowing and voluntary. questions during waiver whether his of the Rule his 11 district court hearing, appellate rights and, was Prior to accepting a guilty plea, a district court must conduct a plea colloquy in which it informs the defendant of, and determines that the defendant comprehends, the nature of the charge to which he is pleading guilty, any mandatory minimum penalty, the maximum possible penalty he faces, and the rights he is relinquishing by pleading guilty. 2 Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b); United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116 (4th Cir. 1991). In reviewing the adequacy of compliance with Rule 11, this Court should accord deference to the trial court s decision as to how best to conduct the mandated colloquy with the defendant. DeFusco, 949 F.2d at 116. We have thoroughly reviewed the record in this case, and conclude that the district court complied with the mandates of Rule 11 in accepting Myers guilty plea. Thus, we hold that the record affirmatively shows there was a factual basis for Myers plea, Myers understood the constitutional rights he waived in pleading guilty, and Myers guilty plea including his appellate waiver was knowing and voluntary. Next, Myers questions whether Amendment 706 to the United States Sentencing Guidelines, which provided for a twolevel downward adjustment to the base offense level assigned to each threshold quantity of crack listed in the Drug Quantity Table in section 2D1.1, should have resulted in a reduced base United States v. Brewer, 520 F.3d offense level in this case. 367, 373 (4th Cir. 2008). already received the The record affirmatively shows Myers benefit of Amendment 706, as his base offense level was calculated pursuant to the 2008 edition of the Sentencing Guidelines, November 1, 2007. and Amendment 706 became effective Brewer, 520 F.3d at 373 (citing United States 3 Sentencing Comm n, Report to Congress: Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy (May 2007)). Finally, we conclude Myers sentence was reasonable. This court reviews a district court s sentence reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard. for Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also United States v. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473-74 (4th Cir. 2007). defendant, a district court must: When sentencing a (1) properly calculate the Guidelines range; (2) determine whether a sentence within that range serves the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006); (3) implement mandatory statutory limitations; and (4) explain Pauley, 511 F.3d at 473. its reasons for selecting a sentence. In the Fourth Sentencing Circuit, Guidelines [a] range sentence is within presumptively the proper reasonable. United States v. Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007); see also Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338, 347-56 (2007) (upholding presumption of reasonableness for a within-Guidelines sentence). Here, the district court followed the necessary procedural steps in sentencing Myers, properly calculating the Guidelines sentence, considering sentencing Myers the crime. to the mandatory § 3553(a) minimum factors, sentence for and his Hence, we determine that the sentence imposed by the district court was reasonable. 4 In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm the district court s judgment. This court requires that counsel inform Myers, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Myers requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in representation. this court for leave to withdraw from Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Myers. 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 5
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.
