US v. Tony Hawk, No. 10-4649 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4649 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TONY DERELL HAWK, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:08-cr-00413-JAB-1) Submitted: December 21, 2010 Decided: January 3, 2011 Before NIEMEYER and KEENAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Amy Lee Copeland, AMY LEE COPELAND, LLC, Savannah, Georgia, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tony Derrell Hawk pleaded guilty to one count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B) (2006), and one count of possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) (2006). Granting the motion of the United States for a downward departure, the district court sentences, ten applicable to sentenced months both active sentence. Hawk below counts. to the consecutive mandatory Hawk now fifty five-year appeals his month minimum 100-month His attorney has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal but asking the court to review the extent of the sentencing departure. Hawk was informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but did not do so. For the reasons that follow, we affirm Hawk s sentence. Appellate extent of the courts district lack court s jurisdiction downward to review departure. the United States v. Hill, 70 F.3d 321, 324 (4th Cir. 1994) (emphasis in original). Accordingly, the ground raised for appeal by counsel on appeal lacks merit. We have examined the entire record in accordance with the requirements of Anders and have found no 2 meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Hawk s conviction. This writing, United of court the States requires right for to further that counsel petition the review. If inform Supreme Hawk Hawk, Court requests of in the that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Hawk. We dispense with oral contentions argument adequately because presented in the the facts and materials legal before the court are 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.
