United States v. Bernabela

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedApril 30, 2009
Docket08-8075
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Bernabela (United States v. Bernabela) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Bernabela, (4th Cir. 2009).

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-8075

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

VINCENT L. BERNABELA, a/k/a Wink, a/k/a Shaun Robinson, a/k/a Lee Alvin Sampson,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Frank D. Whitney, District Judge. (3:01-cr-00148-FDW-4)

Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: April 30, 2009

Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Vincent L. Bernabela, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM:

Vincent L. Bernabela appeals the district court’s

order denying his motion for reduction in sentence pursuant to

18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006). Bernabela’s contentions that the

court could have considered a sentence below the amended

guidelines range and that he was entitled to a full resentencing

hearing under United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), are

foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Dunphy, 551 F.3d

247 (4th Cir. 2009), petition for cert. filed, ___ U.S.L.W. ___

(U.S. Mar. 20, 2009) (No. 08-1185). We have reviewed the record

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the

decision of the district court. We deny Bernabela’s motion for

appointment of counsel and 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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Dunphy
551 F.3d 247 (Fourth Circuit, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Bernabela, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-bernabela-ca4-2009.