Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Unpublished United States Court of Appeals For The Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    8 views3 pages
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Dexter Walton's appeal of his conviction and sentence. The three judge panel affirmed the district court's decision. Specifically: 1) The appeals court found that the district court sufficiently complied with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in accepting Walton's guilty plea and ensuring it was voluntary. 2) Walton claimed error in the calculation of his sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines but failed to object during sentencing, waiving his right to appeal absent plain error which was not found. 3) After examining the full record, the appeals court found no reversible errors and affirmed both the conviction and sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1997-10-09 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 96-4683

    Original Title

    United States v. Walton, 4th Cir. (1997)

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Dexter Walton's appeal of his conviction and sentence. The three judge panel affirmed the district court's decision. Specifically: 1) The appeals court found that the district court sufficiently complied with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in accepting Walton's guilty plea and ensuring it was voluntary. 2) Walton claimed error in the calculation of his sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines but failed to object during sentencing, waiving his right to appeal absent plain error which was not found. 3) After examining the full record, the appeals court found no reversible errors and affirmed both the conviction and sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    8 views3 pages

    Unpublished United States Court of Appeals For The Fourth Circuit

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document is an unpublished opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit regarding Dexter Walton's appeal of his conviction and sentence. The three judge panel affirmed the district court's decision. Specifically: 1) The appeals court found that the district court sufficiently complied with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure in accepting Walton's guilty plea and ensuring it was voluntary. 2) Walton claimed error in the calculation of his sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines but failed to object during sentencing, waiving his right to appeal absent plain error which was not found. 3) After examining the full record, the appeals court found no reversible errors and affirmed both the conviction and sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 3

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.

    No. 96-4683

    DEXTER WILLIAM WALTON,


    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Virginia, at Danville.
    Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge.
    (CR-95-127)
    Submitted: September 9, 1997
    Decided: October 9, 1997
    Before HALL, NIEMEYER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    _________________________________________________________________
    COUNSEL
    Parks N. Small, Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina,
    for Appellant. Anthony Paul Giorno, OFFICE OF THE UNITED
    STATES ATTORNEY, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).
    _________________________________________________________________

    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    Dexter William Walton appeals from his conviction and sentence
    for conspiracy to attempt to possess with intent to distribute cocaine
    base in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846 (1994), and for attempting to
    possess with intent to distribute cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C.
    841(a)(l) (1994). Walton's attorney has filed a brief in accordance
    with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), addressing whether
    the district court complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P.
    11 in accepting Walton's guilty plea and whether the court properly
    imposed Walton's sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines. Counsel
    asserts that there are no meritorious issues for appeal. Walton was
    notified of his right to file an additional brief, but has not done so. We
    affirm.
    Walton contends that the district court improperly conducted the
    Rule 11 hearing in accepting his guilty plea. In reviewing the adequacy of compliance with Rule 11, this court accords great deference
    to the trial court's decision as to how best to conduct the mandated
    colloquy with the defendant. United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114,
    116 (4th Cir. 1991). Rule 11 violations are evaluated under the harmless error standard. Id. at 117. This court may vacate a conviction
    resulting from a guilty plea only if the trial court's violations of Rule
    11 affected the defendant's substantial rights. Id.
    Our review of the record discloses that the district court sufficiently
    complied with Rule 11 in informing Appellant of his rights and in
    ascertaining the voluntariness of his plea. We find that because
    Appellant's substantial rights were not in any way compromised, any
    alleged error during the Rule 11 colloquy was harmless.
    Walton also maintains that the district court inaccurately computed
    his sentence based on the Sentencing Guidelines. However, Walton's
    failure to object during sentencing amounts to a waiver of his right
    to raise that issue on appeal absent plain error. United States v. Ford,
    88 F.3d 1350, 1355-56 (4th Cir.), cert. denied , ___ U.S. ___, 65
    U.S.L.W. 3369 (U.S. Nov. 18, 1996) (No. 96-6379). We find no plain
    error in the record warranting review of Walton's sentence.
    2

    In accordance with Anders, we have examined the entire record in


    this case and find no reversible error. We therefore affirm the conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform his client
    in writing of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United
    States for further review. If the client 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. Counsel's motion must state that a copy thereof was served on
    the client. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court,
    and oral argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    3

    You might also like