Court Opinion

ID: 1000062
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2013-07-04 17:34:37.579847+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:11:30.312178
License: Public Domain

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.                                                                    No. 98-4724

KELVIN JOHNSON,
Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill.
Dennis W. Shedd, District Judge.
(CR-98-360-DWS)

Submitted: September 30, 1999

Decided: October 18, 1999

Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Christopher J. Moran, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Jane
Barrett Taylor, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________
OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Kelvin Johnson pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute cocaine
and cocaine base, 21 U.S.C.A. § 846 (West Supp. 1999), and posses-
sion of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C.A.§ 922(g) (West
Supp. 1999). He now appeals his 348-month sentence. Counsel has
filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967),
stating that in his view there are no meritorious grounds for appeal but
raising one issue: whether Johnson's sentence was disproportionately
high when compared to the 200-month sentence of a codefendant and
leader of the conspiracy. Johnson was informed of his right to file a
pro se supplemental brief but has not done so. Because we find no
reversible error, we affirm.

Johnson was a major crack cocaine supplier in the Ridgeway,
South Carolina, area. He was part of a conspiracy headed by codefen-
dants Odell Woodard and Willie Johnson. Kelvin Johnson admitted
at his guilty plea proceeding that he was responsible for distributing
more than 1.5 kilograms of crack. Further, he was usually armed with
a handgun during drug transactions.

Johnson's guideline range was 360 months to life. This represented
an offense level of 37 and a criminal history category of VI. At sen-
tencing, the court granted Johnson's motion for a downward departure
based on substantial assistance, see U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual § 5K1.1 (1997), and imposed a sentence of 348 months.

Johnson's only argument on appeal is that his sentence was grossly
disproportionate to the 200-month sentence of codefendant Woodard.
A sentencing court need not consider the sentence of a codefendant
when imposing sentence. See United States v. Foutz, 865 F.2d 617,
621 (4th Cir. 1989); United States v. Truelove , 482 F.2d 1361, 1361-
62 (4th Cir. 1973). To the extent that Johnson challenges the district
court's failure to depart downward based on Woodard's sentence, dis-
parity of sentences among codefendants is not a ground for downward
departure absent prosecutorial misconduct. See United States v.
Fonville, 5 F.3d 781, 783-84 (4th Cir. 1993). There is no suggestion

                    2
of misconduct here. We therefore find that the district court did not
err in imposing Johnson's sentence.

As required by Anders, we have examined the entire record in this
case and find no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm
Johnson's 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. This court requires that counsel inform his client in writing
of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for fur-
ther review. If his client requests that a petition be filed, but counsel
believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may
move in this court to withdraw from representation. Counsel's motion
must state that a copy thereof has been served on his client.

AFFIRMED

                    3