United States v. Corey Jenkins
699 F. App'x 180
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Corey Rydell Jenkins was resentenced to 94 months for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2)).
- Counsel filed an Anders brief asserting no meritorious appeal issues but questioning sentence reasonableness; Jenkins did not file a pro se supplemental brief.
- The Government declined to file a response brief.
- The district court calculated the Guidelines range, considered parties’ arguments, and sentenced Jenkins within the Guidelines and statutory maximum.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed the sentence for reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard and considered both procedural and substantive aspects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentence was procedurally reasonable | Jenkins challenged reasonableness of sentence | Government defended district court's Guidelines calculation and consideration of § 3553(a) factors | Court found no procedural error; Guidelines range calculated properly and court articulated reasons |
| Whether the sentence was substantively reasonable | Jenkins argued sentence may be excessive under § 3553(a) | Government argued within-Guidelines sentence is presumptively reasonable | Court presumed within-Guidelines sentence reasonable; Jenkins failed to rebut presumption |
| Whether any meritorious appellate issues exist under Anders | Counsel contended no meritorious grounds for appeal aside from sentence reasonableness | N/A (Government did not file responsive brief) | Court independently reviewed record per Anders and found no meritorious issues |
| Whether counsel must inform defendant of Supreme Court petition rights | Jenkins’ right to seek certiorari exists | N/A | Court required counsel to inform Jenkins in writing and outlined procedure to seek leave to withdraw if certiorari would be frivolous |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (review of sentencing reasonableness under abuse-of-discretion standard)
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (procedures when counsel finds appeal frivolous)
- United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295 (presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences)
- United States v. Dowell, 771 F.3d 162 (procedural sentencing error standards)
- United States v. White, 771 F.3d 225 (standard of review for Guidelines calculations)