Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 20 views

    United States v. Smith, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Robert Jared Smith appealed his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Smith was originally sentenced to life in prison and 20 years in prison concurrently. On a previous appeal, the court affirmed Smith's convictions but vacated his sentence and remanded for resentencing because the district court improperly applied a leadership role sentencing enhancement. At resentencing, the district court removed the enhancement and sentenced Smith to 405 months in prison and 240 months in prison concurrently. In this current appeal, Smith's attorney argued the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy conviction but acknowledged there were no meritorious grounds for appeal. The court declined to

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Smith, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    20 views4 pages
    This document summarizes a court case in which Robert Jared Smith appealed his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Smith was originally sentenced to life in prison and 20 years in prison concurrently. On a previous appeal, the court affirmed Smith's convictions but vacated his sentence and remanded for resentencing because the district court improperly applied a leadership role sentencing enhancement. At resentencing, the district court removed the enhancement and sentenced Smith to 405 months in prison and 240 months in prison concurrently. In this current appeal, Smith's attorney argued the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy conviction but acknowledged there were no meritorious grounds for appeal. The court declined to

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2004-06-08 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 02-4928

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a court case in which Robert Jared Smith appealed his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Smith was originally sentenced to life in prison and 20 years in prison concurrently. On a previous appeal, the court affirmed Smith's convictions but vacated his sentence and remanded for resentencing because the district court improperly applied a leadership role sentencing enhancement. At resentencing, the district court removed the enhancement and sentenced Smith to 405 months in prison and 240 months in prison concurrently. In this current appeal, Smith's attorney argued the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy conviction but acknowledged there were no meritorious grounds for appeal. The court declined to

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    20 views4 pages

    United States v. Smith, 4th Cir. (2004)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a court case in which Robert Jared Smith appealed his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Smith was originally sentenced to life in prison and 20 years in prison concurrently. On a previous appeal, the court affirmed Smith's convictions but vacated his sentence and remanded for resentencing because the district court improperly applied a leadership role sentencing enhancement. At resentencing, the district court removed the enhancement and sentenced Smith to 405 months in prison and 240 months in prison concurrently. In this current appeal, Smith's attorney argued the evidence was insufficient to support the conspiracy conviction but acknowledged there were no meritorious grounds for appeal. The court declined to

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf
    of 4

    Vacated by Supreme Court, June 8, 2009

    UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 02-4928

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    versus
    ROBERT JARED SMITH, a/k/a J Dog,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Charles H. Haden II,
    District Judge. (CR-99-198)

    Submitted:

    May 26, 2004

    Decided:

    June 8, 2004

    Before WILKINSON, KING, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Joan A. Mooney, STILLER & MOONEY, P.L.L.C., Morgantown, West


    Virginia, for Appellant.
    Kasey Warner, United States Attorney,
    John J. Frail, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West
    Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.


    See Local Rule 36(c).

    PER CURIAM:
    Robert Jared Smith appeals following a remand to the
    district court for resentencing.

    For the reasons discussed below,

    we decline to address the issue Smith raises on appeal and affirm.


    Smith

    was

    convicted

    on

    one

    count

    of

    conspiracy

    to

    distribute cocaine base and aiding and abetting possession with


    intent to distribute cocaine base, for which he received concurrent
    sentences

    of

    respectively.

    life

    in

    prison

    and

    twenty

    years

    in

    prison,

    Smith appealed, contending that the district court

    erred in allowing a defense witness to invoke the Fifth Amendment


    privilege against self-incrimination and in increasing his offense
    level by four levels under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
    3B1.1(a) (1999) for having an aggravating role as an organizer or
    leader in the drug conspiracy.

    We affirmed Smiths convictions,

    but vacated his sentence and remanded for resentencing on the


    ground that the district court abused its discretion by applying
    the 3B1.1(a) leadership role enhancement.

    United States v.

    Sayles, 296 F.3d 219, 227 (4th Cir. 2002).


    Upon remand, the district court resentenced Smith without
    the four-level enhancement of his offense level.

    Thus, Smiths

    offense level was reduced to 38 and his criminal history category


    remained category IV, resulting in a guideline range of 324 to 405
    months

    in

    prison.

    He

    received

    - 2 -

    405-month

    sentence

    on

    the

    conspiracy count and a concurrent 240-month sentence on the aiding


    and abetting count.
    Smith now appeals.

    His attorney has filed a brief in

    accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), claiming


    that the evidence was insufficient to support Smiths conspiracy
    conviction, but stating that there are no meritorious grounds for
    appeal.

    Smith

    was

    advised

    of

    his

    right

    to

    file

    pro

    se

    supplemental brief, but he has not filed one.


    Under the mandate rule, consideration of the sufficiency
    of the evidence is foreclosed because this issue was not raised in
    the original appeal and is not reasonably within the scope of the
    mandate.

    Cf. United States v. Bell, 5 F.3d 64, 66 (4th Cir. 1993)

    (when mandate of appellate court is precise, district court may not


    consider issues mandate has laid to rest).

    We accordingly decline

    to address the issue because it is not properly before us.


    We therefore affirm.

    Within the constraints of the

    mandate rule, we have, as required by Anders, reviewed the record


    and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.

    This court

    requires that counsel inform her client, in writing, of his right


    to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further
    review.

    If Smith requests that a petition be filed, but counsel

    believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may


    move in this court to withdraw from representation.

    We dispense

    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

    - 3 -

    adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument


    would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    - 4 -

    You might also like