Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • United States v. Kenneth Lorenzo Long, 977 F.2d 574, 4th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    224 views2 pages
    Kenneth Long appealed his conviction and sentence for bank robbery. His attorney filed a brief under Anders v. California stating the appeal was without merit, though raising one issue regarding Long's sentence. The court affirmed Long's conviction and sentence, finding that he was properly classified as a career offender under the sentencing guidelines. The court conducted an independent review of the record and found no grounds for appeal.

    Original Description:

    Filed: 1992-10-16 Precedential Status: Non-Precedential Citations: 977 F.2d 574 Docket: 91-5364

    Copyright

    © Public Domain

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    Kenneth Long appealed his conviction and sentence for bank robbery. His attorney filed a brief under Anders v. California stating the appeal was without merit, though raising one issue regarding Long's sentence. The court affirmed Long's conviction and sentence, finding that he was properly classified as a career offender under the sentencing guidelines. The court conducted an independent review of the record and found no grounds for appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    224 views2 pages

    United States v. Kenneth Lorenzo Long, 977 F.2d 574, 4th Cir. (1992)

    Uploaded by

    Scribd Government Docs
    Kenneth Long appealed his conviction and sentence for bank robbery. His attorney filed a brief under Anders v. California stating the appeal was without merit, though raising one issue regarding Long's sentence. The court affirmed Long's conviction and sentence, finding that he was properly classified as a career offender under the sentencing guidelines. The court conducted an independent review of the record and found no grounds for appeal.

    Copyright:

    Public Domain
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    Download as pdf
    of 2

    977 F.

    2d 574

    NOTICE: Fourth Circuit I.O.P. 36.6 states that citation of


    unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
    res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
    service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
    Circuit.
    UNITED STATES of AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
    v.
    Kenneth Lorenzo LONG, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 91-5364.

    United States Court of Appeals,


    Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: July 30, 1992
    Decided: October 16, 1992

    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of
    North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. Frank W. Bullock, Jr., District Judge.
    (CR-91-51-WS)
    J. Bradley Purcell, STERN, GRAHAM & KLEPFER, Greensboro, North
    Carolina, for Appellant.
    Robert H. Edmunds, Jr., United States Attorney, Sandra J. Hairston,
    Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
    Appellee.
    M.D.N.C.
    Affirmed.
    Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:

    OPINION

    Kenneth Lorenzo Long appeals from the final judgment and sentence entered
    by the district court following his conviction under 18 U.S.C. 2, 2113(a)
    (1988). Counsel has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386
    U.S. 738 (1967), raising an issue concerning the sentence, but concluding that
    the appeal is without merit. Long was notified of his right to file a supplemental
    brief raising any additional issues he wished considered, but he has failed to do
    so. We affirm.

    Long contends that he was improperly classified as a career offender under


    United States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual, 4B1.1 (Nov.
    1990). The presentence report reveals that all of the prerequisites for imposition
    of the career offender enhancement were met in this case. Long did not
    challenge these factual findings in the district court, nor does he do so on
    appeal. This claim is without merit.

    As required by Anders, we have independently reviewed the entire record and


    all pertinent documents. We have considered all arguable issues presented by
    this record and conclude that there are no nonfrivolous grounds for appeal.
    Accordingly, we affirm the conviction and the sentence imposed.

    Pursuant to the plan adopted by the Fourth Circuit Judicial Council in


    implementation of the Criminal Justice Act of 1964 (18 U.S.C. 3006A
    (1988)), this Court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing, of his
    right to petition the Supreme Court for further review. If requested by his client
    to do so, counsel should prepare a timely petition for a writ of certiorari.

    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

    You might also like