US v. Ariel Molina-Hernandez, No. 12-4800 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4800 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ARIEL GIOVANI MOLINA-HERNANDEZ, a/k/a Jonathan Nol Terron, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:12-cr-00134-WO-1) Submitted: March 28, 2013 Decided: April 1, 2013 Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Todd Allen Smith, LAW OFFICE OF TODD ALLEN SMITH, Graham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Clifton Thomas Barrett, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Ariel violating the sentenced Giovani terms to of twelve Molina-Hernandez his supervised months of pled release imprisonment guilty order to and be to was served consecutively with his fifty-seven-month sentence imposed on the same day for other federal crimes. Molina-Hernandez s counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating his opinion that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but questioning whether the district court properly ran Molina-Hernandez s sentence consecutive to his other federal sentence. Molina-Hernandez was notified of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief but has failed to do Government has declined to file a responsive brief. Because seven-month Molina-Hernandez federal sentence, the was also district so. We affirm. serving court The a fifty- imposed his twelve-month supervised release sentence to run consecutively, as recommended by the Sentencing Guidelines. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual ( USSG ) § 7B1.3(f), p.s. (2011) (recommending supervised a consecutive release when sentence also serving for revocation another of sentence). Moreover, we note that Molina-Hernandez s twelve-month sentence was within his correctly calculated advisory Guidelines range for a Grade B violation of his criminal history category of II. supervised release See USSG § 7B1.4, p.s. 2 and his In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Molina-Hernandez s conviction and sentence. This court writing, of requires the that right to counsel petition United States for further review. that a petition be filed, inform but the Molina-Hernandez, Supreme Court of in the If Molina-Hernandez requests 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 Molina-Hernandez. 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