UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-4877
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MICHAEL GREER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Beckley. Thomas E. Johnston,
District Judge. (5:08-cr-00061-1)
Submitted: April 23, 2009 Decided: April 29, 2009
Before MICHAEL, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mary Lou Newberger, Federal Public Defender, Jonathan D. Byrne,
Appellate Counsel, George H. Lancaster, Jr., Assistant Federal
Public Defender, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. John
J. Frail, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Greer appeals the district court’s judgment
imposing a sentence of 180 months of imprisonment for aiding and
abetting the possession with intent to distribute a quantity of
heroin. On appeal, Greer’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant
to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), noting no
meritorious issues for appeal, but raising the issue of whether
the district court erred by imposing an unreasonable sentence.
Greer was informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental
brief but elected not to do so. Finding no error, we affirm.
We review Greer’s sentence for abuse of discretion.
Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007). The first
step in this review requires us to ensure that the district
court committed no significant procedural error, such as
improperly calculating the guidelines range. United States v.
Osborne, 514 F.3d 377, 387 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct.
2525 (2008). We then consider the substantive reasonableness of
the sentence imposed, taking into account the totality of the
circumstances. Gall, 128 S. Ct. at 597. When reviewing a
sentence on appeal, we presume that a sentence within a
properly-calculated Guidelines range is reasonable. United
States v. Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007).
The record reveals that the district court understood
the Guidelines are advisory, considered the 18 U.S.C.A. §
2
3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2008) factors, and sentenced Greer
within his properly-calculated advisory Sentencing Guidelines
range of 151-188 months of imprisonment. Under these
circumstances, we find the sentence was reasonable. Allen, 491
F.3d at 193.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal. We therefore affirm the district court’s judgment.
This court requires that counsel inform his client, in writing,
of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States
for further review. If the client 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 the client. 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