Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. King, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    5 views2 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed and affirmed Roger King's sentence resulting from the district court's revocation of his supervised release. The Court of Appeals found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking King's supervised release because King admitted to violating the conditions of his release. Additionally, the Court of Appeals determined that King's sentence was not plainly unreasonable given that it fell within the recommended Sentencing Guidelines range and the district court had warned King about potential jail time after his two prior revocation hearings. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed King's sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2003-10-06 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 03-4189

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed and affirmed Roger King's sentence resulting from the district court's revocation of his supervised release. The Court of Appeals found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking King's supervised release because King admitted to violating the conditions of his release. Additionally, the Court of Appeals determined that King's sentence was not plainly unreasonable given that it fell within the recommended Sentencing Guidelines range and the district court had warned King about potential jail time after his two prior revocation hearings. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed King's sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    5 views2 pages

    United States v. King, 4th Cir. (2003)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit reviewed and affirmed Roger King's sentence resulting from the district court's revocation of his supervised release. The Court of Appeals found that the district court did not abuse its discretion in revoking King's supervised release because King admitted to violating the conditions of his release. Additionally, the Court of Appeals determined that King's sentence was not plainly unreasonable given that it fell within the recommended Sentencing Guidelines range and the district court had warned King about potential jail time after his two prior revocation hearings. Therefore, the Court of Appeals affirmed King's sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 03-4189

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ROGER D. KING,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
    District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior
    District Judge. (CR-01-128)

    Submitted:

    September 10, 2003

    Decided:

    October 6, 2003

    Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Edwin C. Walker,


    Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellant.
    Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M.
    Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Christine Witcover Dean,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Roger D. King appeals his sentence resulting from the district
    courts revocation of his term of supervised release. Because King
    admitted to the violations of the conditions of his supervised
    release,

    we

    find

    that

    the

    district

    court

    did

    not

    discretion by revoking the term of supervised release.


    States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638, 642 (4th Cir. 1995).

    abuse

    its

    See United

    We must next

    decide if the sentence imposed by the district court was plainly


    unreasonable.

    See 18 U.S.C. 3742(a)(4) (2000).

    King had two

    previous revocation hearings before the district court and was


    warned that his next appearance would result in jail time.

    The

    district court was also aware that the United States Sentencing
    Guidelines recommended a range of imprisonment between five and
    eleven months given Kings violations.

    The court also considered

    mitigating evidence offered by King before revoking the supervised


    release.

    Given Kings two prior revocation hearings before the

    district court and the fact that the courts sentence was within
    the recommended range of the Sentencing Guidelines, Kings sentence
    is not plainly unreasonable.
    Accordingly, Kings sentence is affirmed.
    oral

    argument

    because

    the

    facts

    and

    legal

    We dispense with
    contentions

    are

    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument


    would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like