Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 77 views

    United States v. Aldridge, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The defendant, Travis McArthur Aldridge, pleaded guilty to distribution of cocaine base. Aldridge's attorney filed an Anders brief raising one potential issue - whether the district court properly accepted Aldridge's guilty plea. The court reviewed the transcript and found that the district court fully complied with the requirements for a guilty plea. The court also reviewed additional issues raised in Aldridge's pro se brief and found them without merit. The court affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Aldridge, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    77 views4 pages
    The defendant, Travis McArthur Aldridge, pleaded guilty to distribution of cocaine base. Aldridge's attorney filed an Anders brief raising one potential issue - whether the district court properly accepted Aldridge's guilty plea. The court reviewed the transcript and found that the district court fully complied with the requirements for a guilty plea. The court also reviewed additional issues raised in Aldridge's pro se brief and found them without merit. The court affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2009-07-28 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 08-5074

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The defendant, Travis McArthur Aldridge, pleaded guilty to distribution of cocaine base. Aldridge's attorney filed an Anders brief raising one potential issue - whether the district court properly accepted Aldridge's guilty plea. The court reviewed the transcript and found that the district court fully complied with the requirements for a guilty plea. The court also reviewed additional issues raised in Aldridge's pro se brief and found them without merit. The court affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Aldridge, 4th Cir. (2009)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The defendant, Travis McArthur Aldridge, pleaded guilty to distribution of cocaine base. Aldridge's attorney filed an Anders brief raising one potential issue - whether the district court properly accepted Aldridge's guilty plea. The court reviewed the transcript and found that the district court fully complied with the requirements for a guilty plea. The court also reviewed additional issues raised in Aldridge's pro se brief and found them without merit. The court affirmed the district court's judgment.

    Copyright:

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

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

    No. 08-5074

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    TRAVIS MCARTHUR ALDRIDGE,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
    District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. John Preston Bailey,
    Chief District Judge. (3:08-cr-00036-JPB-DJJ-1)

    Submitted:

    July 14, 2009

    Decided:

    July 28, 2009

    Before KING and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior


    Circuit Judge.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Brendan S. Leary, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Wheeling,


    West Virginia, for Appellant. Sharon L. Potter, United States
    Attorney, Paul T. Camilletti, Assistant United States Attorney,
    Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Travis

    Aldridge 1

    McArthur

    pleaded

    guilty

    to

    distribution of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)


    (2006).

    The district court sentenced Aldridge to 135 months of

    imprisonment.

    His

    attorney

    has

    filed

    brief

    pursuant

    to

    Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), raising one issue but
    stating

    that

    there

    are

    no

    meritorious

    issues

    for

    appeal.

    Aldridge filed a pro se supplemental brief raising additional


    issues. 2

    We affirm.
    In

    the

    Anders

    brief,

    counsel

    questions

    whether

    district court erred in accepting Aldridges guilty plea.

    the

    Prior

    to accepting a guilty plea, a trial court, through colloquy with


    the defendant, must inform the defendant of, and determine that
    he understands, the nature of the charges to which the plea is
    offered,

    any

    mandatory

    minimum

    penalty,

    the

    maximum

    possible

    penalty he faces, and the various rights he is relinquishing by


    pleading guilty.

    Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b).

    The court also must

    determine whether there is a factual basis for the plea.

    Id.;

    United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 120 (4th Cir. 1991).
    The purpose of the Rule 11 colloquy is to ensure that the plea

    The Appellants true name is Jerron Lamont Cephas.

    We have considered the claims raised in Aldridges pro se


    brief and conclude the claims lack merit.

    of guilt is entered into knowingly and voluntarily.

    See United

    States v. Vonn, 535 U.S. 55, 58 (2002).


    Because Aldridge did not move in the district court to
    withdraw his guilty plea, any error in the Rule 11 hearing is
    reviewed for plain error.

    United States v. Martinez, 277 F.3d

    517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002).

    To establish plain error, [Aldridge]

    must show that an error occurred, that the error was plain, and
    that

    the

    error

    affected

    his

    substantial

    rights.

    United

    States v. Muhammad, 478 F.3d 247, 249 (4th Cir. 2007).

    Even if

    Aldridge satisfies these requirements, correction of the error


    remains
    . . .

    within
    unless

    our
    the

    discretion,
    error

    which

    seriously

    we

    should

    affect[s]

    not
    the

    exercise
    fairness,

    integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.

    Id.

    Our review of the transcript reveals full compliance with the


    requirements of Rule 11, and we conclude that Aldridge pleaded
    guilty knowingly and voluntarily.
    We have examined the entire record in accordance with
    the requirements of Anders and have found no meritorious issues
    for appeal.
    court.
    writing,

    We therefore affirm the judgment of the district

    This court requires that counsel inform Aldridge, in


    of

    the

    right

    to

    petition

    United States for further review.

    the

    Supreme

    Court

    of

    the

    If Aldridge requests that a

    petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition


    would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for
    3

    leave to withdraw from representation.

    Counsels motion must

    state that a copy thereof was served on Aldridge.

    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

    You might also like