Case ID: f-appx_360/html/0500-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Eureka BARNES, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 08-5201.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Aug. 6, 2009.
    Decided: Jan. 12, 2010.
    David B. Betts, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. W. Walter Wilkins, United States Attorney, Carrie A. Fisher, William E. Day, Assistant United States Attorneys, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
    Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Eureka Barnes pled guilty to one count of making false statements to a Secret Service agent, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (2006). Barnes was sentenced to thirty-six months’ imprisonment, and now appeals. Finding no error, we affirm.

We find Barnes’s sentence is not procedurally unreasonable. In sentencing a defendant, a district court must first properly calculate the Guideline range. Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49-50, 128 S.Ct. 586, 596, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007). When reviewing the district court’s application of the Sentencing Guidelines, this court reviews findings of fact for clear error and questions of law de novo. United States v. Osborne, 514 F.3d 377, 387 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 2525, 171 L.Ed.2d 805 (2008).

Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the district court followed the necessary procedural steps in sentencing Barnes, and properly calculated the applicable Guideline range. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction and 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.