United States v. Larry Brown
670 F. App'x 191
| 4th Cir. | 2016Background
- Larry Don Brown pled guilty to conspiracy to distribute, possess with intent to distribute, and manufacture methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 846.
- Plea agreement and factual basis signed by Brown attributed 150–500 grams of actual methamphetamine to him; he reaffirmed this at the plea hearing.
- The presentence report designated Brown a career offender and calculated offense level based on the agreed drug quantity. Brown did not object to those determinations below.
- The district court sentenced Brown to the statutory minimum of 120 months’ imprisonment.
- Appellate counsel filed an Anders brief asserting no meritorious issues but raised potential questions under Johnson and McFadden; Brown filed no pro se brief.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed unobjected-to sentencing issues for plain error and affirmed Brown’s conviction and sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Brown qualified as a career offender (crime of violence) | Brown (via counsel) questioned validity under recent residual-clause rulings | Government relied on district court’s career-offender classification in PSR; Brown made no objection below | No plain error; unsettled law on NC breaking/entering and even if error existed, sentence was statutory minimum so no effect on substantial rights |
| Whether attributed drug quantity (150–500 g) was erroneous | Brown suggested McFadden might undermine quantity-based sentencing | Government relied on Brown’s signed plea agreement and colloquy admitting 150–500 g | No plain error; plea agreement and plea colloquy establish quantity attribution; McFadden inapplicable |
| Standard of review for unpreserved sentencing challenges | N/A | Court: plain-error review applies because Brown did not object below | Applied plain-error test and found it unsatisfied or harmless |
| Whether appellate counsel adequately raised nonfrivolous issues under Anders | N/A | Court reviewed entire record per Anders and found no meritorious issues | Affirmed conviction and sentence; directed counsel to notify Brown of certiorari rights |
Key Cases Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) (procedural framework for counsel filing brief asserting no meritorious appeal)
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (struck down ACCA residual clause)
- McFadden v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2298 (2015) (concerning drug-quantity jury finding and constitutional implications)
- United States v. Carthorne, 726 F.3d 503 (4th Cir. 2013) (standard for reviewing unpreserved sentencing objections)
- United States v. Aplicano-Oyuela, 792 F.3d 416 (4th Cir. 2015) (plain-error test for sentencing)
- United States v. Branch, 537 F.3d 328 (4th Cir. 2008) (harmlessness where sentencing error did not affect substantial rights)
- United States v. Mungro, 754 F.3d 267 (4th Cir. 2014) (North Carolina breaking/entering fits generic burglary for ACCA purposes)