United States v. Sherman Coulter

Fourth Circuit

United States v. Sherman Coulter

85 F. App'x 337

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 15, 2004

Docket03-4533

StatusUnpublished

This text of 85 F. App'x 337 (United States v. Sherman Coulter) 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. Sherman Coulter, 85 F. App'x 337 (4th Cir. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Sherman Coulter pleaded guilty to robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1951 (2000), and to causing death during the commission of a robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 924(j)(l) (2000). Coulter was sentenced to 365 months incarceration, 5 years of supervised release, and a $200 special assessment. Coulter’s attorney has filed a timely appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the district court erred in denying the Government’s motion for Coulter to receive a downward departure for substantial assistance under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5K1.1 (1998).

The district court considered the Government’s motion but found Coulter’s cooperation did not warrant the departure. There are no grounds to conclude the district court was unaware of its authority to grant the departure, and consequently, this issue is not subject to appellate review. United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 876 (4th Cir.1996); United States v. Bailey, 975 F.2d 1028, 1035 (4th Cir.1992); United States v. Bayerle, 898 F.2d 28, 31 (4th Cir.1990).

Accordingly, we affirm Coulter’s conviction and sentence. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and find no other meritorious issues for appeal. 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 such 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 *338 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 argument would not aid in the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

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

PER CURIAM.

Sherman Coulter pleaded guilty to robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1951 (2000), and to causing death during the commission of a robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 924(j)(l) (2000). Coulter was sentenced to 365 months incarceration, 5 years of supervised release, and a $200 special assessment. Coulter’s attorney has filed a timely appeal under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing the district court erred in denying the Government’s motion for Coulter to receive a downward departure for substantial assistance under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5K1.1 (1998).

The district court considered the Government’s motion but found Coulter’s cooperation did not warrant the departure. There are no grounds to conclude the district court was unaware of its authority to grant the departure, and consequently, this issue is not subject to appellate review. United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 876 (4th Cir.1996); United States v. Bailey, 975 F.2d 1028, 1035 (4th Cir.1992); United States v. Bayerle, 898 F.2d 28, 31 (4th Cir.1990).

Accordingly, we affirm Coulter’s conviction and sentence. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record in this case and find no other meritorious issues for appeal. 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 such 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 *338 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 argument would not aid in the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 F. App'x 337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-sherman-coulter-ca4-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack