US v. Andrew Atkinson, No. 12-4812 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4812 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. ANDREW JULIAN ATKINSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:11-cr-00063-NCT-2) Submitted: March 19, 2013 Decided: March 27, 2013 Before KING, GREGORY, and AGEE, 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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: In accordance with a written plea agreement, Andrew Julian Atkinson pled guilty to attempted armed bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 2113(d) (2006), and carrying and using, by brandishing, a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) (2006). He sentence of sixty months in prison. attorney has California, filed 386 a U.S. brief 738 in an aggregate Atkinson now appeals. accordance (1967), meritorious issues for appeal. received stating with that His Anders there are v. no Atkinson was notified of his right to file a pro se brief, but has not filed such a brief. Finding no error, we affirm. Our review of the transcript of Atkinson s Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 hearing discloses that substantially complied with the Rule. establishes that Atkinson entered the district court Further, the transcript his plea knowingly voluntarily and that there was a factual basis for the plea. and We therefore affirm the convictions. Further, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in imposing sentence. States, 552 U.S. 38, procedurally reasonable. 51 (2007). First, See Gall v. United the sentence is In this regard, the court correctly calculated Atkinson s Guidelines range, considered the relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006) factors, and sufficiently explained 2 the sentence, which encompassed both a downward departure and the court s grant of the Government s 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) (2006) motion based on Atkinson s substantial assistance. Second, our review of the sentencing transcript establishes that, based on the totality of the circumstances, the sentence is free of substantive error. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Atkinson, in writing, of therefore the right to affirm Atkinson s petition United States for further review. the convictions Supreme Court of and the If Atkinson 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 of the motion was served on Atkinson. 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