US v. Tremayne Goss, No. 12-4909 (4th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-4909 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. TREMAYNE S. GOSS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (5:12-cr-00157-BO-1) Submitted: June 6, 2013 Decided: June 13, 2013 Before WILKINSON, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Joshua L. Rogers, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Tremayne Goss pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine and possession with intent to distribute a quantity of cocaine and a quantity of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. ยง 841(a) (2006). After sustaining Goss objection to the drug weight attributed to him in the presentence report, the district court imposed a within-Guidelines sentence of eighty-four months imprisonment. Goss appeals. not On appeal, he argues only that his sentence was substantively Guidelines range informant s reasonable driven in uncorroborated because large it was measure statement. by In based a on a confidential opposition, the Government asserts that Goss invited the error of which he now complains. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. As a general rule, a court can not be asked by counsel to take a step in a case and later be convicted of error, because it has complied with such a request. States v. Herrera, 23 F.3d 74, 75 (4th Cir. 1994) Shields v. United States, 273 U.S. 583, 586 (1927)). will not appellant, consider absent alleged a errors showing that were of such invited United (quoting Thus, we by the extraordinary circumstances as an apparent miscarriage of justice or doubt as to the integrity of the judicial process. 2 United States v. Hickman, 626 F.3d 756, 772 (4th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks omitted). At statement, sentencing, asserting Goss that objected it was to vague the and informant s resulted in a substantially higher drug quantity than that involved in his offenses. requested As a remedy for these objections, defense counsel only that the district court remove one ounce of cocaine from the informant s drug weight estimate to qualify Goss for the lower base offense level of twenty-six. The court did just this, adopting the lower drug weight as requested by Goss and imposing a sentence within the Guidelines established by the resulting base offense level. range Goss made no further objection to this Guidelines range and did not request a different sentence. Goss does not demonstrate that a miscarriage of justice will result from, or that the judicial process will be compromised by, the alleged error. Because the sentence Goss now identifies as unreasonable resulted from a remedy his counsel specifically requested, we conclude that Goss argument is invited error not subject to review by this court. * * In any event, were we to consider the issue on its merits, we would conclude without difficulty that Goss has not met his burden to rebut the presumption of substantive reasonableness accorded his within-Guidelines sentence. See United States v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 379 (4th Cir. 2006). 3 Accordingly, we affirm the district court s judgment. We dispense contentions with are oral argument adequately because presented in the facts and the materials legal before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 4
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.
