Professional Documents
Culture Documents
United States v. Carlos Bernard Adams, 96 F.3d 1439, 4th Cir. (1996)
United States v. Carlos Bernard Adams, 96 F.3d 1439, 4th Cir. (1996)
3d 1439
Carlos Bernard Adams pled guilty to possession of crack cocaine with intent to
distribute, 21 U.S.C.A. 841 (West 1981 & Supp.1996), nearly a year after he
was arrested by state authorities during a controlled drug buy in July 1994.
Adams was sentenced to a term of 98 months imprisonment. His attorney has
filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
raising two issues but indicating that, in his view, there are no meritorious
issues for appeal. Adams has filed a pro se supplemental brief, an amended
supplemental brief, and a reply brief. Finding no error after a review of the
entire record, we affirm.
2
Adams' counsel first suggests that the district court failed to comply adequately
with Fed.R.Crim.P. 11 in accepting his guilty plea because, in summarizing the
plea agreement, the prosecutor failed to state that Adams' cooperation had to be
substantial to earn a motion for a departure. However, because the plea
agreement so stated, any error in this regard was harmless. Fed.R.Crim.P.
11(h). Second, he questions whether the district court erred in failing to depart.
Because the government did not move for a substantial assistance departure,
USSG 5K1.1,* the district court lacked authority to depart downward on that
basis.
Consequently, Adams did not qualify for a sentence under the safety valve
provisions of 18 U.S.C.A. 3553(f) (West Supp.1996), which would not have
lowered his sentence in any case because his guideline range of 87-108 months
was higher than the mandatory minimum sentence of 60 months.
The probation officer and the district court correctly calculated Adams' offense
level. We are unable to discern any bias or prejudice on the part of the district
court either from the court's comments during the various proceedings or from
the government's dismissal of federal charges against one co-defendant
(deferring to state prosecution) or the fact that another received a lower
sentence than Adams did.
Adams maintains that the government failed to prove that the substance seized
was crack cocaine rather than some other form of cocaine base. However, he
agreed in the district court that the substance was crack and we find that the
factual basis for his plea was more than adequate. Similarly, Adams' claim that
Contrary to Adams' assertion, the federal statute of limitations had not run when
he was arrested by federal authorities in January 1995. An indictment must be
handed down within five years after the commission of a noncapital offense. 18
U.S.C. 3282 (1988). Because the record below does not conclusively
demonstrate that Adams received ineffective assistance of counsel, we will not
consider this claim on direct appeal. United States v. Williams, 977 F.2d 866,
871 (4th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 507 U.S. 942 (1993).
In accordance with Anders, we have examined the entire record in this case and
find no meritorious issues for appeal. Therefore, we affirm the conviction and
the 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.
10
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
adequately presented in the record and briefs, and oral argument would not aid
the decisional process.