US v. Robert Campbell, No. 12-5018 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 12-5018 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. ROBERT TYRONE CAMPBELL, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III, Chief District Judge. (5:12-cr-00019-D-1) Submitted: December 20, 2013 Decided: January 23, 2014 Before MOTZ and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William T. Russell, Jr., Juan A. Arteaga, SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT, LLP, New York, New York, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Yvonne V. Watford-McKinney, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Robert Tyrone Campbell pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. sentence. He now appeals his 188-month We affirm. Campbell s Guidelines range was 180-210 months. At sentencing on November 13, 2012, the district court overruled three factual report. The objections court then arguments of counsel. that, in accordance § 5G1.3(b)(1) (2012), to the heard presentence Campbell s investigation allocution and the Pertinent to this appeal, Campbell asked with U.S. Sentencing he receive credit Guidelines against his Manual federal sentence for approximately fourteen months that he had served on a related state sentence. The district court found that Campbell was entitled to credit under the Guidelines. In imposing the 188-month sentence, the court emphasized that the sentence reflected that credit. Campbell contends that the district court s sentence was unreasonable under the totality of the circumstances. court reviews a sentence for procedural and This substantive reasonableness under an abuse of discretion standard. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). We discern no error in this case. The 188-month sentence is procedurally reasonable: the district court properly 2 calculated the advisory Guidelines range, considered the factors set forth at 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2006), analyzed the arguments presented selected by the sentence, parties, and sufficiently including the credit U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3(b)(1). States v. Lynn, 592 F.3d explained applied pursuant the to See Gall, 552 U.S. at 49-51; United 572, 575-76 (4th Cir. 2010). We further conclude that the sentence is substantively reasonable based on the totality of the circumstances. We accordingly affirm. 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.
