Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 24 views

    United States v. Cox, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jason Cox's convictions and sentence for conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud and aiding and abetting, and identity theft. Cox pled guilty to the charges in district court and was sentenced to 23 months imprisonment for the bank fraud charges and a consecutive 24 months for the identity theft charge, along with supervised release. The Court of Appeals found no errors with Cox's plea agreement, guilty plea proceedings, or sentencing and determined his within-Guidelines sentence was reasonable.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Cox, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    24 views4 pages
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jason Cox's convictions and sentence for conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud and aiding and abetting, and identity theft. Cox pled guilty to the charges in district court and was sentenced to 23 months imprisonment for the bank fraud charges and a consecutive 24 months for the identity theft charge, along with supervised release. The Court of Appeals found no errors with Cox's plea agreement, guilty plea proceedings, or sentencing and determined his within-Guidelines sentence was reasonable.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2011-03-04 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 10-4586

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jason Cox's convictions and sentence for conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud and aiding and abetting, and identity theft. Cox pled guilty to the charges in district court and was sentenced to 23 months imprisonment for the bank fraud charges and a consecutive 24 months for the identity theft charge, along with supervised release. The Court of Appeals found no errors with Cox's plea agreement, guilty plea proceedings, or sentencing and determined his within-Guidelines sentence was reasonable.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Cox, 4th Cir. (2011)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed Jason Cox's convictions and sentence for conspiracy to commit bank fraud, bank fraud and aiding and abetting, and identity theft. Cox pled guilty to the charges in district court and was sentenced to 23 months imprisonment for the bank fraud charges and a consecutive 24 months for the identity theft charge, along with supervised release. The Court of Appeals found no errors with Cox's plea agreement, guilty plea proceedings, or sentencing and determined his within-Guidelines sentence was reasonable.

    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. 10-4586

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    JASON COX,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.
    William L. Osteen,
    Jr., District Judge. (1:08-cr-00214-WO-3)

    Submitted:

    February 4, 2011

    Decided:

    March 4, 2011

    Before AGEE, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Stacey D. Rubain, QUANDER & RUBAIN, P.A., Winston-Salem, North


    Carolina, for Appellant.
    Robert Michael Hamilton, Assistant
    United
    States
    Attorney,
    Greensboro,
    North
    Carolina,
    for
    Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    Jason Cox pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to
    commit

    bank

    fraud,

    in

    violation

    of

    18

    U.S.C.

    371,

    1344

    (2006), one count of bank fraud and aiding and abetting such
    fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1344(2) & 2 (2006), and one
    count of identity theft, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1028A(a)(1)
    (2006).

    He was sentenced to twenty-three months imprisonment

    for the two bank fraud convictions and a consecutive two-year


    statutory sentence for the identity theft conviction.

    He was

    also sentenced to a three year term of supervised release for


    the

    conspiracy

    conviction,

    five

    year

    term

    of

    supervised

    release for the substantive bank fraud conviction and a one year
    term of supervised release for the identity theft conviction,
    all running concurrently.

    In addition, Cox was ordered to pay

    restitution in the amount of $97,869.39, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.


    3663A (2006).

    Counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.

    California,

    386

    U.S.

    meritorious

    issues

    738

    for

    (1967),

    appeal.

    certifying
    Cox

    was

    there

    informed

    were

    no

    of

    the

    opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief, but did not do


    so.

    The Government did not file a brief.

    We affirm.

    We find no error with the plea agreement or the Rule


    11 colloquy.

    Cox appeared competent to plead guilty and was

    aware of the charges against him, the possible penalties and the

    assorted rights he was waiving or losing by virtue of his pleas


    and his convictions.

    Accordingly, we affirm his convictions.

    We also conclude there was no error at sentencing.


    There were no objections to the properly calculated Sentencing
    Guidelines.

    The district court was aware that the Guidelines

    were advisory and that it should consider the sentencing factors


    under 18 U.S.C. 3553(a).

    It was clear the court considered

    counsels

    sentence

    arguments

    for

    at

    the

    of

    the

    Guidelines and for a three year term of supervised release.

    The

    within Guidelines sentence is reasonable.

    low

    end

    See United States v.

    Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007).


    In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
    in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
    We therefore affirm Coxs convictions and sentence.

    This court

    requires that counsel inform Cox, in writing, of the right to


    petition

    the

    Supreme

    Court

    of

    the

    United

    States

    for

    further

    review.

    If Cox requests that a petition be filed, but counsel

    believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel


    may

    move

    in

    representation.

    this

    and

    legal

    for

    leave

    to

    withdraw

    from

    Counsels motion must state that a copy thereof

    was served on Cox.


    facts

    court

    We dispense with oral argument because the

    contentions

    are

    adequately

    presented

    in

    the

    materials

    before

    the

    court

    and

    argument

    would

    not

    aid

    the

    decisional process.
    AFFIRMED

    You might also like