Unpublished
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-4866
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
NATHANIEL JAMAL FARMER, a/k/a Gucci,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District
Judge. (3:12-cr-00513-JFA-11)
Submitted:
November 17, 2014
Decided:
December 1, 2014
Before SHEDD, AGEE, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Michael Chesser, Aiken, South Carolina, for Appellant.
John
David Rowell, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Nathaniel Farmer appeals the district courts criminal
judgment sentencing him to 151 months imprisonment pursuant to
his guilty plea to one count of conspiracy to conduct a pattern
of racketeering activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1962(d)
and 1963(a) (2012).
Farmers counsel filed a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there
are no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning whether
the district court erred in finding that Farmer was a career
offender.
Although advised of his right to do so, Farmer did
not file a supplemental brief.
response.
The Government did not file a
We affirm.
Because Farmer did not object to his career offender
status in the district court, we review this issue for plain
error.
See United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 (1993).
To be a career offender, (1) Farmer must have been at least
eighteen
years
old
at
the
time
of
the
instant
offense
of
conviction; (2) the instant offense must be a felony that is a
crime
of
violence
or
controlled
substance
offense,
and
(3) Farmer must have at least two prior felony convictions that
are either crimes of violence or controlled substance offenses.
U.S.
Sentencing
contests
element
convictions
for
Guidelines
(3),
Manual
claiming
possession
of
2
(USSG)
that
cocaine
his
4B1.1.
two
with
prior
the
Farmer
felony
intent
to
distribute cannot be considered "prior felony convictions" for
career offender purposes because they were actually part of the
instant offense.
Our
review
of
the
record
reflects
that
Farmer
properly adjudged a career offender under the Guidelines.
was
Where
the crime charged is racketeering, the Guidelines provide that a
previously imposed sentence result[ing] from a conviction prior
to the last overt act of the conspiracy, which is also charged
as
part
of
pattern
of
racketeering
activity,
is
to
be
treated as a prior sentence, not part of the instant offense.
USSG 2E1.1 cmt. n.4 (internal quotation marks omitted).
We
thus conclude that the district court did not plainly err in
counting the disputed convictions and holding that Farmer was a
career
offender
under
the
Guidelines.
See
United
States
v.
Marrone, 48 F.3d 735, 740-41 (3d Cir. 1995).
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore affirm the district courts judgment.
This Court
requires that counsel inform Farmer, in writing, of the right to
petition
the
Supreme
review.
If
Farmer
Court
of
requests
the
that
United
a
States
petition
be
for
further
filed,
but
counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then
counsel
may
move
representation.
in
this
Court
for
leave
to
withdraw
from
Counsels motion must state that a copy thereof
3
was served on Farmer.
We dispense with oral argument because
the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials
before
this
Court
and
argument
would
not
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
