United States of America v. Frederick Lamont Smith

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 08-4398
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
FREDERICK LAMONT SMITH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-4399
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SCOTTIE RAY EDGEWORTH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-4615
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.

-- 1 of 4 --

FREDERICK LAMONT SMITH,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 08-4620
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
KENYON DAJUAN GAITHER, a/k/a Ken Ken,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District
of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District
Judge. (4:07-cr-00208-TLW-1; 4:07-cr-00208-TLW-4; 4:07-cr-
00208-TLW-6)
Submitted: May 20, 2009 Decided: June 11, 2009
Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
D. Craig Brown, THE LAW OFFICE OF D. CRAIG BROWN, Florence,
South Carolina; John M. Ervin, III, ERVIN LAW OFFICE,
Darlington, South Carolina; Janis Richardson Hall, Greenville,
South Carolina, for Appellants. Arthur Bradley Parham,
Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

-- 2 of 4 --

PER CURIAM:
Frederick Lamont Smith, Scottie Ray Edgeworth, and
Kenyon Dajuan Gaither appeal the district court’s judgments
imposing sentences of 220, 240, and 240 months’ imprisonment,
respectively, following their guilty pleas to conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of cocaine
base and five kilograms or more of cocaine, in violation of 21
U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A), and 846 (2006). On appeal,
counsel for Smith, Edgeworth, and Gaither filed a brief pursuant
to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), noting no
meritorious issues for appeal, but questioning whether the
district court complied with Fed. R. Crim. P. 11. Gaither filed
a pro se supplemental brief, contending his sentence was
improperly enhanced under 21 U.S.C. § 851 (2006). Finding no
error, we affirm.
We have reviewed the record and conclude that the
district court complied with the requirements of Fed. R. Crim.
P. 11. We further find that the district court did not abuse
its discretion in sentencing Smith, Edgeworth, and Gaither, and
imposed sentences that are procedurally and substantively
reasonable. See Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597
(2007) (review of sentence is for abuse of discretion). We
particularly note that the 240-month sentences imposed on
3

-- 3 of 4 --

4
Edgeworth and Gaither were the minimum sentences statutorily
required.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in these cases and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal. We therefore affirm the district court’s judgments.
This court requires that counsel inform their clients, in
writing, of their right to petition the Supreme Court of the
United States for further review. If the clients request that
petitions be filed, but counsel believes that such filing would
be frivolous, then counsel may move in this court for leave to
withdraw from representation. Counsel’s motion must state that
a copy thereof was served on the clients.
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

-- 4 of 4 --