Case ID: f-appx_452/html/0349-01.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. Timothy BALLARD, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 11-4126.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Sept. 27, 2011.
    Decided: Oct. 24, 2011.
    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.
    Before MOTZ, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
   Vacated and remanded for resentencing by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Ballard appeals his 180-month sentence received for his conviction in May 2009 for the distribution of 50 grams or more of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A) (2006). Ballard’s sole contention on appeal is that, because he was not sentenced until after August 3, 2010, he should have been sentenced under the provisions of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, Pub.L. No. Ill— 220, 124 Stat. 2372 (the “FSA”). Although the Government resisted this line of argument in the district court, it now agrees before this court that Ballard’s sentence should be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing.

We, therefore, vacate Ballard’s sentence and remand this case to the district court to permit resentencing. By this disposition, however, we indicate no view as to whether the FSA is retroactively applicable to a defendant like Ballard whose offenses were committed prior to August 3, 2010, the effective date of the FSA, but who was sentenced after that date. We leave that determination in the first instance to the district court. 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED FOR RESENTENCING.