UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-4399
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
BRIAN CLIFTON JACKSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Martinsburg. Gina M. Groh,
District Judge. (3:13-cr-00001-GMG-DJJ-1)
Submitted: December 20, 2013 Decided: February 6, 2014
Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brian J. Kornbrath, Federal Public Defender, Clarksburg, West
Virginia, for Appellant. Stephen Donald Warner, Assistant
United States Attorney, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Brian Clifton Jackson appeals his conviction and the
eighty-four-month sentence imposed following his guilty plea to
use of a communication facility in furtherance of a drug
transaction, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b) (2012).
Jackson’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), concluding that there are no
meritorious issues for appeal. Jackson was notified of his
right to file a pro se supplemental brief but has not done so.
The Government has declined to file a response brief. Following
a careful review of the record, we affirm.
Before accepting Jackson’s guilty plea, the district
court conducted a thorough plea colloquy, fully complying with
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and ensuring that Jackson’s plea was knowing
and voluntary and supported by an independent factual basis.
See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 117 (4th Cir. 1991).
The court subsequently followed all necessary procedural steps
in sentencing Jackson, properly calculating his Guidelines
range, considering the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012) factors and
the parties’ arguments, and providing an individualized
assessment based on the facts presented. See Gall v. United
States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). Jackson’s within-Guidelines
sentence is presumed substantively reasonable on appeal, and he
2
has not met his burden to rebut this presumption. United States
v. Montes-Pineda, 445 F.3d 375, 379 (4th Cir. 2006).
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore affirm Jackson’s conviction and sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform Jackson, in
writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the
United States for further review. If Jackson 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 Jackson.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument will not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3