UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-4728
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DERRICK KELVIN ABRAMS, a/k/a Willie Herman Newsome,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad,
Jr., District Judge. (3:14-cr-00172-RJC-1)
Submitted: May 2, 2016 Decided: May 4, 2016
Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chiege O. Kalu Okwara, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Derrick Kelvin Abrams pled guilty in accordance with a
written plea agreement to passport fraud, 18 U.S.C. § 1542
(2012) (Count One), and aggravated identity theft, 18 U.S.C.
§ 1028A(a)(1) (2012) (Count Three). He was sentenced to zero
months on Count One and twenty-four months, consecutive, on
Count Three. Abrams now appeals. His attorney has filed a
brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), questioning the reasonableness of the sentence, but
concluding that there are no meritorious issues for appeal.
Abrams was advised of the right to file a pro se brief but has
not filed such a brief. We affirm.
After careful review, we hold that the guilty plea was
knowing and voluntary. Abrams stated at the Fed. R. Crim. P. 11
hearing that he was not under the influence of drugs or alcohol.
He expressed satisfaction with his attorney’s services. A
factual basis for the plea was presented to the court, and
Abrams admitted his guilt. Finally, the district court
substantially complied with the requirements of Rule 11.
With respect to sentencing, the court properly calculated
the Guidelines range, considered the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) (2012)
factors and the arguments of the parties, and provided a
sufficiently individualized assessment based on the facts of the
case. We therefore conclude that the statutorily-required
2
24-month sentence is procedurally reasonable. Additionally,
given the totality of the circumstances, the sentence is
substantively reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S.
38, 51 (2007); United States v. Carter, 564 F.3d 325, 330 (4th
Cir. 2009).
Pursuant to Anders, we have reviewed the entire record and
have found no meritorious issues for appeal. Accordingly, we
affirm the district court’s judgment. This court requires that
counsel inform Abrams, in writing, of the right to petition the
Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If
Abrams 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
Abrams. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before this court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
3