US v. Robert Baldwin, No. 10-4951 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4951 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. ROBERT ANDAWAN BALDWIN, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:09-cr-00393-JAB-1) Submitted: June 30, 2011 Decided: July 5, 2011 Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Stacey D. Rubain, QUANDER & RUBAIN, P.A., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Graham Tod Green, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Robert Andawan Baldwin pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(B) (2006), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) (2006). minimum of sentence Baldwin s counsel Baldwin 120 has months filed a received the imprisonment. brief statutory pursuant On to appeal, Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), asserting that, in her opinion, there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but positing that Baldwin should receive a sentence reduction reflecting the reduction in the crack to powder cocaine ratio implemented by the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 ( FSA ), Pub. L. No. 111-220, 124 Stat. Baldwin 2372. has Although not filed a informed pro se of his right supplemental Government has declined to file a response. to do brief. so, The We affirm. In relevant part, the FSA increased the quantity of crack cocaine necessary to trigger sentences set forth in 21 U.S.C. § 841. the mandatory This court has recently concluded that the FSA does not apply retroactively. States v. Bullard, ___ F.3d ___, (4th Cir. convicted May and 6, 2011) sentenced (No. See United __, 2011 WL 1718894, at *9-*11 09-5214). before minimum the FSA Because took Baldwin effect, he properly sentenced under the version of § 841 then in effect. 2 was was In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Baldwin s convictions and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Baldwin, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Baldwin 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 Baldwin. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court 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.
