US v. Tyrone Goldston, No. 10-4830 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: <
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4830 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TYRONE RICHARD GOLDSTON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:09-cr-00315-NCT-1) Submitted: March 31, 2011 Decided: April 5, 2011 Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brian M. Aus, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Sandra Jane Hairston, Assistant United States Attorney, Anna Mills Wagoner, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tyrone Richard Goldston pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute 188 grams of cocaine base ( crack ). was sentenced to 240 months of imprisonment. He On appeal, counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but raising the following issue: whether the abused its discretion in sentencing Goldston. district court For the reasons that follow, we affirm. We find no abuse of discretion in the district court s sentencing of Goldston. (2007) (noting reasonableness a Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 district under an court s sentence abuse-of-discretion is reviewed standard); States v. Pauley, 511 F.3d 468, 473 (4th Cir. 2007). for United Here, the district court, after listening to the arguments of counsel, hearing from Goldston himself, and expressly considering the 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2010) factors, departed below Goldston s Guidelines sentence. range 21 properly-calculated and U.S.C. imposed a § 841(b)(1) advisory Sentencing mandatory-minimum twenty-year (2006). Thus, this claim fails. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Goldston s conviction and sentence. 2 This court requires that counsel inform Goldston, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Goldston requests 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 Goldston. 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.
