United States of America v. Samuel Henry Vinci, Jr.

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-4087
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
SAMUEL HENRY VINCI, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Richard L.
Voorhees, District Judge. (5:15-cr-00041-RLV-DCK-1)
Submitted: September 29, 2016 Decided: October 3, 2016
Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Leslie Carter Rawls, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville,
North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Samuel Henry Vinci, Jr., pled guilty, pursuant to a written
plea agreement, to enticement of a minor to engage in sexual
activity, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) (2012). The
district court sentenced Vinci to 235 months’ imprisonment, a
sentence at the bottom of the applicable Sentencing Guidelines
range. Counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no
meritorious grounds for appeal. Although notified of his right
to do so, Vinci has not filed a pro se brief.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for
appeal. Before accepting Vinci’s guilty plea, the district
court conducted a thorough plea colloquy, satisfying the
requirements of Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and ensuring that Vinci’s
plea was knowing, voluntary, and supported by an independent
factual basis. See United States v. DeFusco, 949 F.2d 114, 116
(4th Cir. 1991). We discern no procedural error in the
sentencing process, see Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51
(2007), and Vinci does not rebut our appellate presumption that
his within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable, see
United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir. 2014).
We therefore affirm Vinci’s conviction and sentence. This
court requires that counsel inform Vinci, in writing, of the

-- 2 of 3 --

3
right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Vinci requests that a petition be filed, but
counsel believes that such a petition 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 Vinci. We dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before this court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --