UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-4610
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JEFFERY PEDRO STIVENDER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior
District Judge. (3:06-cr-00791-MJP)
Submitted: December 14, 2007 Decided: January 10, 2008
Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Allen B. Burnside, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Columbia,
South Carolina, for Appellant. Kevin F. McDonald, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Jeffery Pedro Stivender
pled guilty to one count of making false claims to the Internal
Revenue Service, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 287, 2 (2000). The
district court imposed a forty-one-month sentence. Stivender
timely appealed.
Stivender’s attorney has filed a brief in accordance with
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), questioning whether the
district court erred by considering the intended loss, rather than
the actual loss, in calculating Stivender’s guideline range.
Counsel states, however, that he has found no meritorious grounds
for appeal. Stivender was advised of his right to file a pro se
supplemental brief, but he did not file one. Finding no
meritorious grounds for appeal, we affirm.
Stivender argues that the court should have considered
the actual loss, rather than the intended loss, in calculating his
guideline range. However, the guidelines authorize the district
court to increase the offense level based on the greater of the
actual or intended loss, U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2B1.1
cmt. n.3(A) (2006), and in this case, the intended loss was greater
than the actual loss. We therefore conclude that Stivender’s claim
is without merit.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in
this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
Accordingly, we affirm Stivender’s conviction and sentence.
- 2 -
This court requires that counsel inform Stivender, in
writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United
States for further review. If Stivender requests that 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 representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a
copy thereof was served on Stivender. 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 -