US v. Adilser Pinzon-Hernandez, No. 13-4175 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4175 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ADILSER PINZON-HERNANDEZ, a/k/a Adilser Adilsey Pinzon, a/k/a Gildardo Gonzalez, Pinzon, a/k/a Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:12-cr-00136-RJC-1) Submitted: January 29, 2014 Decided: February 12, 2014 Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Henderson Hill, Executive Director, Joshua B. Carpenter, FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC., Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anne M. Tompkins, United States Attorney, William M. Miller, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIUM: Adilser Pinzon-Hernandez pled guilty, without the benefit of a written plea agreement, to illegally reentering the United States after having been previously deported subsequent to an aggravated felony conviction, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2) (2012). The court sentenced Pinzon-Hernandez to one year and one day of imprisonment. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning applying the trafficking whether the eight-level offense to district court enhancement plainly for Pinzon-Hernandez a erred felony sentence. by drug Pinzon- Hernandez was advised of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but he did not do so. We review reasonableness standard. We affirm. Pinzon-Hernandez under a sentence deferential for abuse-of-discretion Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007). A sentence is procedurally reasonable if, among other factors, the court properly range. the calculates the defendant s advisory See id. at 49-51 (listing factors). district court properly Guidelines We conclude that calculated Pinzon-Hernandez advisory Guidelines range, as Pinzon-Hernandez Texas conviction for delivery felony drug of cocaine trafficking is included offense 2 under in the the definition Guidelines. of a U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2L1.2 cmt. n.1(B)(iv) (2011); see United States v. Marban-Calderon, 631 F.3d 210, 212-13 (5th Cir. 2011) (holding that Texas conviction for delivering controlled substance categorically qualifies as felony drug trafficking offense). In remainder accordance of the with record Anders, in this meritorious issues for appeal. court s judgment. This Pinzon-Hernandez, in Supreme the Court of United have case and reviewed have found the no We therefore affirm the district court writing, we requires of the States that right for counsel to inform petition further the review. If Pinzon-Hernandez requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in representation. this court for leave to withdraw from Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Pinzon-Hernandez. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal before contentions this court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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.
