US v. Luis Ramos, No. 13-4725 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4725 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. LUIS ELRIQUE RAMOS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:13-cr-00033-TDS-1) Submitted: March 27, 2014 Before MOTZ, Circuit Circuit Judges. Judge, Decided: March 31, 2014 and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lisa S. Costner, LISA S. COSTNER, P.A., Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anand P. Ramaswamy, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Luis Elrique Ramos appeals his conviction and 10-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to failure to register as a sex offender, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a) (2012). On appeal, Ramos counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), concluding that there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Ramos was notified of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so. The Government has declined to file a response brief. Following a careful review of the record, we affirm. Before accepting Ramos guilty plea, the district court conducted a thorough plea colloquy, fully complying with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and ensuring that Ramos plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by an independent factual basis. See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116 (4th Cir. 1991). The court followed all necessary procedural steps in sentencing Ramos, the 18 properly U.S.C. calculating § 3553(a) his Guidelines (2012) factors range, and considering the parties arguments, and providing an individualized assessment based on the facts presented. (2007). See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 Ramos within-Guidelines sentence of imprisonment is presumed substantively reasonable on appeal, and he has not met his burden to rebut this presumption. See United Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 379 (4th Cir. 2006). 2 States v. And although the district court varied upward in imposing a term of supervised release, citing the need for deterrence, we conclude the court s judgment in this regard was not unreasonable. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Ramos conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Ramos, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Ramos 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 Ramos. 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.
