United States v. Ollie Pettiford, 4th Cir. (2011)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUnited States v. Ollie Pettiford, 4th Cir. (2011)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-4097
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
OLLIE OCTAVIOUS PETTIFORD,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
William L. Osteen,
Jr., District Judge. (1:09-cr-00378-WO-1)
Submitted:
September 29, 2011
Decided:
October 4, 2011
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stacy D. Rubain, QUANDER & RUBAIN, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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:
Ollie Octavious Pettiford pled guilty to possession of
a firearm after having been convicted of a felony offense, in
violation
possession
of
of
18
U.S.C.
922(g)(1),
stolen
firearm,
922(j), 924(a)(2) (2006).
to 180 months imprisonment.
in
924(e)(1)
violation
(2006),
of
18
and
U.S.C.
The district court sentenced him
Pettifords attorney filed a brief
in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
stating that, in counsels view, there are no meritorious issues
for
appeal,
sentenced
as
but
an
questioning
armed
whether
career
Pettiford
criminal.
was
properly
Pettiford
filed
supplemental pro se brief, also contesting his classification as
an
armed
career
criminal.
Finding
no
reversible
error,
we
affirm Pettifords conviction and sentence.
A person who violates 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) and has
three prior convictions for a violent felony offense qualifies
as
an
armed
career
criminal
and
minimum sentence of fifteen years.
is
subject
to
mandatory
See 18 U.S.C. 924(e)(1).
Our review of the record shows that Pettiford had three prior
qualifying convictions.
The district court therefore correctly
determined that Pettiford qualified as an armed career criminal
and his advisory Guidelines range was properly calculated at 180
to 210 months.
The district court considered the sentencing factors
in
light
determined
of
Pettifords
that
the
characteristics
180-month
mandatory
and
minimum
sufficient to serve the goals of sentencing.
this sentence was reasonable.
history
and
sentence
was
We conclude that
See Gall v. United States, 552
U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see United States v. Llamas, 599 F.3d 381,
387 (4th Cir. 2010).
We have reviewed the entire record in this case and
have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
affirm the district courts judgment.
Accordingly we
This court requires that
counsel inform Pettiford, in writing, of the right to petition
the Supreme Court of the United States for further review.
Pettiford
requests
that
petition
be
filed,
but
If
counsel
believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel
may
move
in
representation.
this
court
for
leave
to
withdraw
from
Counsels motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Pettiford.
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
