UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-5108
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TYRONE ERNELL HINTON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Louise W. Flanagan,
District Judge. (5:09-cr-00110-FL-1)
Submitted: May 8, 2012 Decided: June 6, 2012
Before KEENAN, DIAZ, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer
P. May-Parker, Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tyrone Ernell Hinton pled guilty, without a plea
agreement, to one count of bank robbery, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 2113(a) (2006). The district court sentenced Hinton to
188 months in prison, the top of the advisory Guidelines range.
In reaching this sentence, the district court took into
consideration several factors, including the need to deter such
criminal conduct, to protect the public, to promote respect for
the law, and to get Hinton mental health treatment. Hinton
timely appeals, asserting that the district court committed
plain error by basing his sentence on his need for mental health
treatment. For the following reasons, we affirm.
As Hinton acknowledges, we review his claim for plain
error because he raises it for the first time on appeal. United
States v. Lynn, 592 F.3d 572, 580 (4th Cir. 2010). To establish
plain error, Hinton must show that the court’s sentence was
based on error, that was plain, and that affected his
substantial rights. United States v. Strieper, 666 F.3d 288,
295 (4th Cir. 2012). Even if Hinton makes this showing, we will
not correct the error unless “it seriously affects the fairness,
integrity or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” Id.
(internal quotation marks and citations omitted).
At sentencing, a court may discuss a defendant’s
opportunities for rehabilitation or treatment programs during
2
incarceration. Tapia v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2382, 2392
(2011). However, the court may not impose or increase the
length of a sentence for the purpose of ensuring that the
defendant receive rehabilitative services. Id. at 2393.
Even assuming that the district court improperly
considered Hinton’s need for psychological treatment as a basis
for his sentence, we find that Hinton has not shown that the
error affected his substantial rights.
Generally, for an error to affect a defendant’s
substantial rights it must be prejudicial, meaning “there must
be a reasonable probability that the error affected the outcome
. . . .” United States v. Marcus, 130 S. Ct. 2159, 2164 (2010).
In the sentencing context, an error affects substantial rights
only if the defendant can show that the sentence imposed was
longer than the sentence he would have received without the
error. United States v. Hughes, 401 F.3d 540, 548 (4th Cir.
2005); see also United States v. Angle, 254 F.3d 514, 518 (4th
Cir. 2001) (en banc) (explaining that sentencing error affects
substantial rights if the actual sentence is “longer than that
to which [the defendant] would otherwise be subject”); see also
United States v. Hernandez, 603 F.3d 267, 272 (4th Cir. 2010)
(holding defendant failed to show lack of a more detailed
explanation had a prejudicial impact on the sentence imposed).
3
Here, the district court provided several legitimate
grounds for sentencing Hinton at the top of the Guidelines
range, and Hinton fails to show that there is a reasonable
probability that the court would have imposed a lower sentence
had it not improperly considered his need for psychological
treatment. Accordingly, we affirm Hinton’s sentence. 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