UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-4490
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FERNANDO GARCIA, a/k/a Jose Garcia-Hernandez,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:08-cr-00243-TDS-1)
Submitted: July 1, 2010 Decided: July 15, 2010
Before DUNCAN, AGEE, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
James E. Quander, Jr., QUANDER & RUBAIN, P.A., Winston-Salem,
North Carolina, for Appellant. Angela Hewlett Miller, Assistant
United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Fernando Garcia pled guilty to one count of illegal
reentry by a previously deported alien who had been convicted of
an aggravated felony, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2)
(2006). He was sentenced to sixty months’ imprisonment. His
counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S.
738 (1967), certifying there are no meritorious arguments for
appeal. Garcia did not file a pro se supplemental brief and the
Government did not file a response brief. We affirm.
We hold, based on our review of the Rule 11 hearing,
that Garcia’s guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. Thus, we
affirm the conviction. We have also reviewed the presentence
investigation report and the sentencing transcript, including
counsel’s argument for a below-Guidelines sentence, and hold
that there was no procedural or substantive error in the
district court’s decision to impose a within-Guidelines
sentence.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore affirm Garcia’s conviction and sentence. This
court requires that counsel inform Garcia, in writing, of his
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Garcia requests a petition be filed, but
counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous,
2
counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from
representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Garcia. 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