UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4536
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
TERRANCE LEROY FISHER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. W. Earl Britt, Senior
District Judge. (7:02-cr-103-BR)
Submitted: February 23, 2007 Decided: March 19, 2007
Before WIDENER and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Geoffrey Wuensch Hosford, HOSFORD & HOSFORD, P.L.L.C., Wilmington,
North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B. Holding, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Terrance L. Fisher appeals his sentence following remand1
on his conviction on five counts of distributing cocaine base, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). The district court sentenced
Fisher to concurrent 211-month terms of imprisonment and concurrent
three-year terms of supervised release.2 Fisher’s sole issue on
appeal is whether the sentence imposed by the district court was
reasonable. Finding no reversible error, we affirm.
This court reviews the imposition of a sentence for
reasonableness. Booker, 543 U.S. at 260-61; Hughes, 401 F.3d at
546-47. After Booker, courts must calculate the appropriate
guideline range, making any appropriate factual findings. United
States v. Davenport, 445 F.3d 366, 370 (4th Cir. 2006). The court
then should consider the resulting advisory guideline range in
conjunction with the factors under 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000
& Supp. 2006), and determine an appropriate sentence. Id. A
1
Following our affirmance of Fisher’s conviction and sentence,
United States v. Fisher, No. 03-4259, 2004 WL 370240 (4th Cir. Mar.
1, 2004) (unpublished), his petition for certiorari was granted by
the United States Supreme Court, and his case was remanded to us
for reconsideration in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S.
220 (2005). Fisher v. United States, 543 U.S. 1099 (2005). We
remanded Fisher’s case to the district court for resentencing,
pursuant to our decision in United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540
(4th Cir. 2005). United States v. Fisher, No. 03-4259, 2006 WL
521713, *1 (4th Cir. Mar. 3, 2006) (unpublished).
2
The district court originally sentenced Fisher to concurrent
235-month terms of imprisonment, concurrent three-year terms of
supervised release, and an $8500 fine.
- 2 -
sentence within the proper advisory guidelines range is
presumptively reasonable. United States v. Green, 436 F.3d 449,
457 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 2309 (2006).
We find that the district court properly calculated the
guideline range and appropriately treated the guidelines as
advisory. The court sentenced Fisher only after considering the
factors set forth in § 3553(a), and Fisher’s arguments based on
those factors. The district court stated that it was imposing
sentence in accordance with Booker, and noted that it was
sentencing Fisher in the middle of the advisory guideline range
based on Fisher’s criminal history. There is nothing in the record
to support Fisher’s claim that the district court failed to
consider either his arguments for a lower sentence or that it
failed in its duty to consider the § 3553(a) factors. There is no
evidence that the sentence is procedurally or substantively
unreasonable. We find Fisher’s sentence to be reasonable.
We therefore affirm Fisher’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
- 3 -