Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. William Anderson, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    30 views4 pages
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving William Junior Anderson's appeal of his convictions and life sentence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's rulings. It found that Anderson's jailhouse confession was properly admitted, as there was no evidence the government elicited it. It also found no clear error in the district court attributing Anderson's murder of Cade Aldridge during a robbery, based on trial evidence, which resulted in a base offense level calling for a life sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines. The Court of Appeals declined to address drug quantity attribution issues as they did not impact the sentence.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1999-12-29 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Docket: 99-4036

    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 summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving William Junior Anderson's appeal of his convictions and life sentence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's rulings. It found that Anderson's jailhouse confession was properly admitted, as there was no evidence the government elicited it. It also found no clear error in the district court attributing Anderson's murder of Cade Aldridge during a robbery, based on trial evidence, which resulted in a base offense level calling for a life sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines. The Court of Appeals declined to address drug quantity attribution issues as they did not impact the sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    30 views4 pages

    United States v. William Anderson, 4th Cir. (1999)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    This document summarizes a United States Court of Appeals case involving William Junior Anderson's appeal of his convictions and life sentence. The Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's rulings. It found that Anderson's jailhouse confession was properly admitted, as there was no evidence the government elicited it. It also found no clear error in the district court attributing Anderson's murder of Cade Aldridge during a robbery, based on trial evidence, which resulted in a base offense level calling for a life sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines. The Court of Appeals declined to address drug quantity attribution issues as they did not impact the sentence.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 4

    UNPUBLISHED

    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS


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

    No. 99-4036

    WILLIAM JUNIOR ANDERSON,


    Defendant-Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
    Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge.
    (CR-97-110)
    Submitted: December 14, 1999
    Decided: December 29, 1999
    Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges,
    and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    _________________________________________________________________
    COUNSEL
    Randolph M. Lee, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Mark T.
    Calloway, United States Attorney, Gretchen C. F. Shappert, Assistant
    United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.
    _________________________________________________________________
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
    Local Rule 36(c).

    OPINION
    PER CURIAM:
    A jury convicted William Junior Anderson of (1) conspiracy to
    possess with intent to distribute cocaine, cocaine base, and marijuana;
    (2) possession with intent to distribute marijuana and aiding and abetting; and (3) use of a firearm during and in relation to a drug trafficking crime. The district court sentenced Anderson to life imprisonment
    on the two drug charges and a five year consecutive term of imprisonment on the firearm charge. Anderson appeals, alleging the district
    court incorrectly admitted a jailhouse confession he gave to another
    inmate and erroneously attributed to him at sentencing a murder and
    drug quantities from other conspiracies. We affirm.
    Anderson alleges his Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated when the district court admitted at trial his post-indictment jailhouse confession. Although Anderson initially objected to admission
    of this evidence, the trial transcript reveals he quickly abandoned the
    objection and assented to admission of the evidence. Finding Anderson failed to properly object and preserve this issue for appeal, our
    review is for plain error. See United States v. Castner, 50 F.3d 1267,
    1277 (4th Cir. 1995).
    We find the district court did not commit error by admitting into
    evidence Anderson's confession to a fellow inmate. There was no
    proof that the Government deliberately elicited the incriminating
    statements or in any way recruited the witness to collect information
    from Anderson. See United States v. Love, 134 F.3d 595, 604 (4th Cir.
    1998), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 66 U.S.L.W. 3790 (U.S. June 15,
    1998) (No. 97-9085). Accordingly, we find Anderson's Sixth Amendment claim to be without merit.
    Anderson next argues that the murder of Cade Aldridge was erroneously attributed to him at sentencing. A district court's factual
    determination regarding the Sentencing Guidelines is reviewed for
    clear error. See United States v. Nale, 101 F.3d 1000, 1003 (4th Cir.
    1996). "If the court's findings may rationally be said to be supported
    by a preponderance of the evidence, they may not be disturbed on
    appeal." United States v. Crump, 120 F.3d 462, 468 (4th Cir. 1997).
    2

    A sentence for a drug conspiracy conviction or drug possession


    conviction is determined pursuant to 2D1.1 of the U.S. Sentencing
    Guidelines Manual. That section cross-references 2A1.1, which
    provides a base offense level of 43 when a victim is killed under circumstances that would constitute murder under 18 U.S.C.A. 1111
    (West 1984 & Supp. 1999).* Anderson's two drug convictions fell
    under USSG 2D1.1.
    The evidence produced at Anderson's trial established that Anderson and three other individuals, who were named co-defendants,
    devised a plan to rob Aldridge of money and marijuana. The plan was
    executed by Anderson and the three individuals. While Anderson and
    one of the co-defendants were in Aldridge's residence stealing money
    and marijuana, Aldridge appeared and Anderson shot and killed him.
    The trial testimony further revealed that Anderson admitted to his codefendants and a cell-mate that he had shot Aldridge and had taken
    the shell casing from the scene of the crime so that he could not be
    linked to the shooting. The evidence further established that two of
    the co-defendants with whom Anderson planned and carried out the
    robbery were also involved with him in the drug conspiracy for which
    he was convicted.
    These underlying facts were contained in the presentence report
    (PSR) and were the basis of the PSR's recommendation that the
    cross-referenced 2A1.1 be utilized. The district court adopted the
    PSR's factual findings and Guidelines' application and sentenced
    Anderson to life imprisonment on one of the drug charges, five years'
    imprisonment on the other drug charge, concurrent to the life imprisonment, and a consecutive five year term of imprisonment on the firearm charge.
    A review of the trial transcript reveals that the district court's findings, as contained in the PSR, are supported by a preponderance of
    the evidence. We therefore find that the district court's finding that
    Aldridge's death warranted application of USSG 2A1.1, which
    resulted in a sentence of life imprisonment, was not clearly erroneous.
    _________________________________________________________________
    *"Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought. Every murder . . . committed in the perpetration of . . . burglary,
    or robbery . . . is murder in the first degree." 18 U.S.C.A. 1111(a).
    3

    We decline to address Anderson's claim that the district court erroneously attributed to him drug quantities from other conspiracies in
    which he denies involvement. The Sentencing Guidelines provided
    for a base offense level of 43 for the murder of Aldridge without consideration of other relevant conduct under 2A1.1. Thus, any calculation of drug quantity by the district court had no impact on
    Anderson's sentence.
    We therefore affirm Anderson's convictions and 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
    4

    You might also like