United States v. Washington

• Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
• Decided: February 2, 2006
• Docket: 05-4229
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-4229

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JAMES W. WASHINGTON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan, Chief District Judge. (CR-04-139-FL)

Submitted: January 18, 2006 Decided: February 2, 2006

Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Jane E. Pearce, Research and Writing Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c). PER CURIAM:

James W. Washington appeals his twenty-four-month

sentence, which was imposed after the district court revoked his

supervised release. Washington contends that the district court

erred by imposing a sentence above the advisory guidelines range.

We affirm.

The sentencing guidelines range for revocations of

supervised release is purely advisory, United States v. Denard, 24

F.3d 599, 602 (4th Cir. 1994), and the district court sufficiently

stated a factual basis for sentencing Washington outside of the

recommended guidelines range. Washington repeatedly violated the

terms of his release by using cocaine and missed several drug

treatment aftercare appointments. Therefore, the district court’s

sentence was reasonable and was not an abuse of discretion.

Accordingly, we affirm Washington’s 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

- 2 -