Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-07-04572/USCOURTS-ca4-07-04572-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Tony Zaquece Wheeler
Appellant

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-4572

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

TONY ZAQUECE WHEELER,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Senior,

Senior District Judge. (1:06-cr-00323-WLO)

Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 18, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Louis C. Allen III, Federal Public Defender, William S. Trivette,

Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Randall S.

Galyon, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North

Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 07-4572 Doc: 26 Filed: 12/18/2007 Pg: 1 of 3
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Tony Zaquece Wheeler was convicted by a jury of five

counts of distribution of crack cocaine. He was sentenced to the

statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 240 months in prison. On

appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting

his convictions and the reasonableness of his sentence. We affirm.

We will not reverse a conviction on the grounds of

insufficiency of the evidence unless the prosecution has clearly

failed to present evidence supporting a conclusion of the

defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v.

Jones, 735 F.2d 785, 791 (4th Cir. 1984). Here, Wheeler contends

that the testimony of two eye witnesses that he distributed crack

on five separate occasions was insufficient to support his

convictions in the absence of fingerprints and further

corroboration, especially given the background of a cooperating

witness. However, the uncorroborated testimony of one witness may

be sufficient to sustain a conviction. Unites States v. Wilson,

115 F.3d 1185, 1190 (4th Cir. 1997). In addition, while Wheeler

questions the reliability of the witnesses’ testimony, we will not

reexamine credibility findings. See United States v. Saunders, 886

F.2d 56, 60 (4th Cir. 1989). Accordingly, we find that sufficient

evidence supported Wheeler’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

With regard to Wheeler’s sentence, the district court

lacked the authority to sentence Wheeler below the statutory

Appeal: 07-4572 Doc: 26 Filed: 12/18/2007 Pg: 2 of 3
- 3 -

mandatory minimum sentence. See United States v. Allen, 450 F.3d

565, 568-69 (4th Cir. 2006). Thus, Wheeler’s sentence, which was

within the presumptively reasonable guideline range, was

reasonable. See United States v. Moreland, 437 F.3d 424, 433 (4th

Cir.), cert. denied, 126 S. Ct. 2054 (2006) (standard of review).

Accordingly, we affirm Wheeler’s convictions 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

Appeal: 07-4572 Doc: 26 Filed: 12/18/2007 Pg: 3 of 3