Opinion

United States v. Brown

  • 213 F. App'x 216
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Filed
Jan 22, 2007
Status
Published
On the bench
Gregory, Traxler, Wilkinson
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 12.8%

noting that sentencing courts should determine the sentence range under the guidelines, consider other statutory factors, and impose a reasonable sentence within the statutory maximum

How later courts described this case

  • noting that sentencing courts should determine the sentence range under the guidelines, consider other statutory factors, and impose a reasonable sentence within the statutory maximum

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

PER CURIAM:

Rashawn Ali Brown appeals from his eighteen-month sentence imposed pursuant to his guilty plea to possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. On appeal, he asserts that his sentence was unreasonable because “it is greater than necessary to comply with the purposes of sentencing.” We have carefully reviewed *217 the record and Brown’s contentions and find that the sentence imposed by the district court at the bottom of the guideline range was reasonable. See United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540, 546-47 (4th Cir. 2005) (noting that sentencing courts should determine the sentence range under the guidelines, consider other statutory factors, and impose a reasonable sentence within the statutory maximum). Accordingly, we affirm Brown’s sentence. 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.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.