UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 17-4423
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GEORGE EARL GEE, a/k/a G,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt.
Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District Judge. (8:15-cr-00317-DKC-3)
Submitted: January 11, 2018 Decided: January 29, 2018
Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Julie M. Reamy, JULIE M. REAMY, ATTORNEY AT LAW, LLC, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellant. Joseph Ronald Baldwin, Jennifer Regina Sykes, OFFICE OF
THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
George Earl Gee appeals from his conviction and 216-month sentence entered
pursuant to his Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(C)(1)(c) guilty plea to conspiracy to distribute and to
possess with intent to distribute cocaine, cocaine base, and heroin. On appeal, counsel
has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there
are no meritorious issues for appeal, but questioning whether a proper factual basis
supported Gee’s guilty plea. Gee has filed a pro se supplemental brief raising numerous
issues. The Government has declined to file a brief. We affirm.
Counsel avers that the Government failed to produce any evidence of the chemical
composition or the actual weight of the drugs involved in Gee’s crime. Prior to accepting
a guilty plea, “the [district] court must determine that there is a factual basis for the plea.”
Fed. R. Crim. P. 11(b)(3); see United States v. Ketchum, 550 F.3d 363, 366 (4th Cir.
2008) (recognizing that defendant may challenge on appeal district court’s failure to
develop factual basis on record). We review a “district court’s finding of a factual basis
for abuse of discretion, and . . . will not find an abuse of discretion so long as the district
court could reasonably have determined that there was a sufficient factual basis based on
the record before it.” Ketchum, 550 F.3d at 367 (citation and internal quotation marks
omitted).
At his plea hearing, Gee admitted he was involved in a drug conspiracy, and he
stated his agreement with the Government’s factual basis. The factual basis included the
drug types and quantity for which Gee was held responsible, and these factual statements
were not disputed. Because Gee agreed to the factual basis before entering his guilty
2
plea, his belated objections are without merit, and we find that the district court
developed an appropriate factual basis.
We have reviewed Gee’s supplemental pro se briefs and have considered the
arguments raised therein; however, we find his claims to be without merit. In accordance
with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record for meritorious issues and have found
none. Accordingly, we affirm Gee’s conviction and sentence.
This court requires that counsel inform Gee in writing of his right to petition the
Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Gee requests that a petition be
filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may
move this court for leave to withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state
that a copy thereof was served on Gee. 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