Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 159 views

    United States v. Kimario Simmons, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Kimario Jerrod Simmons appealed his conviction and 57-month sentence for possessing a firearm after a prior felony conviction. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment. The appellate court found that the sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable, properly calculating and considering the sentencing guidelines and 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors. The court examined all issues raised by Simmons and his appellate counsel and found no meritorious issues for appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd

    United States v. Kimario Simmons, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    159 views4 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Kimario Jerrod Simmons appealed his conviction and 57-month sentence for possessing a firearm after a prior felony conviction. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment. The appellate court found that the sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable, properly calculating and considering the sentencing guidelines and 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors. The court examined all issues raised by Simmons and his appellate counsel and found no meritorious issues for appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 2013-08-13 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 12-4782

    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 United States Court of Appeals case in which Kimario Jerrod Simmons appealed his conviction and 57-month sentence for possessing a firearm after a prior felony conviction. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment. The appellate court found that the sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable, properly calculating and considering the sentencing guidelines and 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors. The court examined all issues raised by Simmons and his appellate counsel and found no meritorious issues for appeal.

    Copyright:

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

    United States v. Kimario Simmons, 4th Cir. (2013)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case in which Kimario Jerrod Simmons appealed his conviction and 57-month sentence for possessing a firearm after a prior felony conviction. The appellate court affirmed the district court's judgment. The appellate court found that the sentence was procedurally and substantively reasonable, properly calculating and considering the sentencing guidelines and 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) factors. The court examined all issues raised by Simmons and his appellate counsel and found no meritorious issues for appeal.

    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. 12-4782

    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,


    Plaintiff Appellee,
    v.
    KIMARIO JERROD SIMMONS,
    Defendant - Appellant.

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
    South Carolina, at Charleston. C. Weston Houck, Senior District
    Judge. (2:11-cr-02114-CWH-1)

    Submitted:

    July 24, 2013

    Decided:

    August 13, 2013

    Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.

    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

    Michael Chesser, Aiken, South Carolina, for Appellant.


    Alston
    Calhoun Badger, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Matthew
    J. Modica, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, South
    Carolina, for Appellee.

    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

    PER CURIAM:
    A

    federal

    jury

    convicted

    Kimario

    Jerrod

    Simmons

    of

    possessing a firearm after sustaining a prior conviction for an


    offense punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year,
    in violation of 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1) (2006).

    The district

    court sentenced Simmons to fifty-seven months of imprisonment


    and

    he

    now

    pursuant

    appeals.

    to

    Anders

    Appellate
    v.

    counsel

    California,

    386

    has

    filed

    U.S.

    questioning whether the sentence was reasonable.

    738

    brief

    (1967),

    Simmons filed

    a supplemental pro se brief raising additional issues. *

    Finding

    no error, we affirm.
    Counsel questions whether the sentence is procedurally
    reasonable, arguing that the district court implicitly presumed
    the advisory Guidelines to be reasonable.

    We review a sentence

    for reasonableness, applying an abuse of discretion standard.


    Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007); see also United
    States v. Layton, 564 F.3d 330, 335 (4th Cir. 2009).
    doing,
    error,

    we

    examine

    including

    the

    sentence

    failing

    to

    for

    significant

    calculate

    (or

    In so

    procedural
    improperly

    calculating) the Guidelines range, treating the Guidelines as


    mandatory,

    failing

    to

    consider

    the

    [18

    U.S.C.]

    3553(a)

    We have thoroughly considered the arguments raised in


    Simmons pro se supplemental brief and conclude that they lack
    merit.

    [(2006)]

    factors,

    selecting

    sentence

    based

    on

    clearly

    erroneous facts, or failing to adequately explain the chosen


    sentence.

    Gall, 552 U.S. at 51.


    Although

    sentencing

    court

    may

    not

    apply

    presumption of reasonableness to the advisory Guidelines, see


    Nelson

    v.

    United

    States,

    555

    U.S.

    350,

    352

    (2009),

    we

    will

    presume on appeal that a sentence within a properly calculated


    advisory

    Guidelines

    range

    is

    reasonable.

    United

    States

    v.

    Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007); see Rita v. United
    States, 551 U.S. 338, 346-56 (2007) (upholding presumption of
    reasonableness

    for

    within-Guidelines

    sentence).

    We

    have

    thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude that the sentence is


    both procedurally and substantively reasonable.
    We have examined the entire record in accordance with
    the requirements of Anders and have found no meritorious issues
    for appeal.

    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district

    court.

    This

    writing,

    of

    court
    the

    requires

    right

    to

    that

    petition

    United States for further review.

    counsel
    the

    inform

    Supreme

    Simmons,

    Court

    of

    in
    the

    If Simmons requests that a

    petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition


    would be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for
    leave to withdraw from representation.

    Counsels motion must

    state that a copy thereof was served on Simmons.

    We dispense

    with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
    3

    adequately

    presented

    in

    the

    materials

    before

    this

    court

    and

    argument would not aid in the decisional process.

    AFFIRMED

    You might also like