US v. Dedric Johnson, No. 12-4721 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4721 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DEDRIC LOUIS JOHNSON, a/k/a Big Boy, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Greenville. J. Michelle Childs, District Judge. (6:10-cr-00257-JMC-1) Submitted: April 25, 2013 Before NIEMEYER and Senior Circuit Judge. GREGORY, Decided: Circuit Judges, May 2, 2013 and HAMILTON, Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Margaret A. Chamberlain, CHAMBERLAIN LAW FIRM, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Alan Lance Crick, Assistant United States Attorney, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Dedric Louis Johnson was convicted by a jury in March 2011 of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine associated substantive counts. term of life convictions. appealed. imprisonment 21 U.S.C. and and numerous He was sentenced to a mandatory based § marijuana on two prior 841(b)(1)(A) felony (2006). drug Johnson Prior to filing briefs, the parties filed a joint motion to remand for resentencing in accordance with the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA). We granted the motion Johnson s case was remanded to the district court. States v. Johnson, No. 11-4777 (4th Cir. and See United Order entered October 20, 2011). Johnson was resentenced months imprisonment. brief in accordance in September He timely appealed. with Anders v. 2012 to 120 Counsel has filed a California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but questioning whether the district court erred denying Johnson s motion to dismiss the indictment. advised of his right to file a pro se in Although supplemental brief, Johnson has not done so. Prior dismiss the to trial, superseding Johnson indictment raised a arguing pro that se motion the to statute referenced in it applied only to heroin, not to crack cocaine or 2 marijuana, with which he was charged. properly denied Johnson s motion. cocaine base provisions. (crack) and The district court Section 841 clearly includes marijuana within its penalty See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b); see also 21 U.S.C. § 812 (2006) (including cocaine (in all its forms) and marijuana in its list of controlled substances ). In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Johnson s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Johnson, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Johnson 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 Johnson. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 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.
