United States of America v. Tony Marichal Sharp, a/k/a TJ

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4426
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TONY MARICHAL SHARP, a/k/a TJ,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Dever III,
Chief District Judge. (5:13-cr-00237-D-2)
Submitted: March 11, 2015 Decided: March 19, 2015
Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Wayne Buchanan Eads, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States Attorney,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Tony Marichal Sharp appeals the 480-month sentence imposed
by the district court after Sharp pled guilty to conspiracy to
distribute and possess with intent to distribute 280 grams or
more of cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1),
846 (2012), and to aiding and abetting the discharge of a
firearm in connection with a drug distribution offense, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c), 2 (2012). Sharp’s counsel has
filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738
(1967), stating that he has found no meritorious grounds for
appeal but raising a potential issue regarding the
reasonableness of Sharp’s sentence. Although informed of his
right to do so, Sharp has not filed a pro se supplemental brief.
We affirm.
Sharp asserts on appeal that his sentence is too long. Our
review of the record on appeal leaves us without doubt that
there is no procedural or substantive error in the district
court’s imposition of a sentence of 480 months’ imprisonment.
See Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007) (discussing
review of sentences); United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295,
306 (4th Cir.) (providing that sentence within properly
calculated Guidelines range is presumed reasonable), cert.
denied, 135 S. Ct. 421 (2014).

-- 2 of 3 --

3
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire
record for any meritorious grounds for appeal and have found
none. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
This court requires that counsel inform Sharp, in writing, of
his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for
further review. If Sharp requests that a petition be filed, but
counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous,
counsel may move in this court for leave to withdraw from
representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Sharp. 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 --