UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 04-4781
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
BEVERLY J. CRAFT,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L. Voorhees,
District Judge. (CR-04-17)
Submitted: March 9, 2005 Decided: April 7, 2005
Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Aaron E. Michel, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Gretchen C. F. Shappert, United States Attorney, Charlotte, North
Carolina; Amy E. Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Beverly J. Craft appeals the fourteen month sentence
imposed by the district court for violations of her supervised
release.* Craft did not object to imposition of sentence at the
revocation hearing, and thus this court’s review is for plain
error. United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 732 (1993). Four
conditions must be met before this Court will notice plain error:
(1) there must be error; (2) it must be plain under current law;
(3) it must affect substantial rights, typically meaning the
defendant is prejudiced by the error in that it affected the
outcome of the proceedings; and (4) the error must seriously affect
the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial
proceedings. Olano, 507 U.S. at 733-37. Craft claims she lacks
control over her actions due to mental illness, but offers no
evidence of insanity, incompetence, or an inability to understand
her actions. The district court considered the relevant factors
and policy statements at issue, and we conclude that the court did
not plainly err in imposing the sentence. Therefore, we affirm.
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
*
Because the sentencing guidelines relating to revocation of
supervised release have always been advisory, see U.S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual Ch. 7, Pt. A, United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct.
738 (2005), does not impact the sentence imposed upon Craft.