UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4110
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
ANTHONY WILLIAMS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(CR-04-644)
Submitted: October 25, 2006 Decided: November 14, 2006
Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
J. Bradley Bennett, SALVINI & BENNETT, LLC, Greenville, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Reginald I. Lloyd, United States
Attorney, William E. Day, II, Assistant United States Attorney,
Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Anthony Williams appeals his conviction and twenty-five
month prison sentence pursuant to his guilty plea to one count of
accepting bribes as a public official, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 201(b)(2) (2000). The only issue on appeal is whether the
district court erred in applying an eight-level offense level
enhancement at sentencing based on its finding that Williams held
a high-level decision-making or sensitive position, pursuant to
U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2C1.1(b)(2)(B) (2000).
We have reviewed the record, the district court’s
decision, and the parties’ briefs. We conclude that Williams, the
director of a halfway house, was an official holding a high-level
decision-making or sensitive position, and thus the district court
did not err in applying the enhancement. See United States v.
ReBrook, 58 F.3d 961, 970 (4th Cir. 1995); see also United
States v. Reneslacis, 349 F.3d 412, 416 (7th Cir. 2003); United
States v. Snell, 152 F.3d 345, 346 (5th Cir. 1998).
Accordingly, we affirm Williams’s conviction and
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 -