US v. Reco Wilkerson, No. 12-4098 (4th Cir. 2012)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4098 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. RECO JANAVIS WILKERSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:11-cr-00158-TDS-1) Submitted: July 26, 2012 Decided: August 13, 2012 Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Mark E. Edwards, EDWARDS AND TRENKLE, PLLC, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Michael A. DeFranco, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Reco Janavis Wilkerson appeals from his conviction and 86-month sentence entered pursuant to his possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. guilty plea to Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but questioning whether the district court erred by not sentencing Wilkerson to a lower sentence. Government has filed a brief. Neither Wilkerson nor the After a careful review of the record, we affirm. Wilkerson asserts that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing him to 86 months instead of 84 months, the bottom of the 84-105 month Guidelines range. not aver that the district court erred Wilkerson does in its sentencing procedures, and our review of the record discloses no procedural error. by We assess the substantive reasonableness of the sentence taking Where, as Guidelines into account here, range, a the totality defendant s the court s any reasonableness reasoning accorded to his circumstances. falls within decision enjoys the a United States v. Abu Ali, 528 F.3d 210, 260-61 (4th Cir. 2008). provided the sentence district presumption of reasonableness. of Because Wilkerson has not rebut the presumption within-Guidelines 2 sentence of and because no such reasoning can be found in the record, we conclude that Wilkerson s sentence is substantively reasonable. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case for reversible error and have found none. Accordingly, we affirm Wilkerson s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Wilkerson in writing of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Wilkerson requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Wilkerson. 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.
