UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 09-5052
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SABRENA ARNETIA MYERS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence. R. Bryan Harwell, District Judge.
(4:09-cr-00229-RBH-2)
Submitted: January 18, 2011 Decided: January 25, 2011
Before NIEMEYER, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John M. Ervin, III, Darlington, South Carolina, for Appellant.
Carrie Ann Fisher, Rose Mary Sheppard Parham, Assistant United
States Attorneys, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Sabrena Arnetia Myers pled guilty pursuant to a
written plea agreement to conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute cocaine and fifty grams or more of cocaine base.
Myers was sentenced to a 120-month mandatory minimum sentence.
See 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A)(iii) (2006). On appeal, counsel
has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), asserting there are no meritorious grounds for appeal,
but raising the following issues: (1) whether the district court
erred at Myers’ plea hearing, and (2) whether Myers’ sentence
was reasonable. For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
In the absence of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea,
this court reviews the adequacy of the guilty plea pursuant to
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 for plain error. United States v. Martinez,
277 F.3d 517, 525 (4th Cir. 2002). Our review of the transcript
of the plea hearing leads us to conclude that the district court
fully complied with Rule 11 in accepting Myers’ guilty plea.
The court ensured that Myers understood the charge against her
and the potential sentence she faced, that she entered her plea
knowingly and voluntarily, and that the plea was supported by an
independent factual basis. United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d
114, 116, 119-20 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we affirm Myers’
conviction.
2
We have also reviewed Myers’ sentence and determine
that it was properly calculated and that the sentence imposed
was reasonable. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007);
United States v. Llamas, 599 F.3d 381, 387 (4th Cir. 2010). The
district court followed the necessary procedural steps in
sentencing Myers, appropriately treated the sentencing
guidelines as advisory, properly calculated and considered the
applicable guidelines range, and weighed the relevant 18
U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2010) factors. We
conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
imposing the chosen sentence. Gall, 552 U.S. at 41; United
States v. Allen, 491 F.3d 178, 193 (4th Cir. 2007) (applying
appellate presumption of reasonableness to within guidelines
sentence).
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case, including the issues raised in Myers’ pro se
supplemental brief, and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal. We therefore affirm Myers’ conviction and sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform Myers, in writing, of
the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Myers 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
3
was served on Myers. 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
4