United States of America v. Danny Lee McCollum

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 15-4441
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
DANNY LEE MCCOLLUM,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:14-cr-00432-WO-1)
Submitted: March 30, 2016 Decided: April 13, 2016
Before GREGORY and DIAZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Seth A. Neyhart, STARK LAW GROUP, PLLC, Chapel Hill, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Randall Stuart Galyon, OFFICE OF THE
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Danny Lee McCollum pled guilty pursuant to a written plea
agreement to one count of distribution of cocaine base. The
district court sentenced him to 30 months’ imprisonment, to be
followed by four years of supervised release. On appeal,
McCollum’s counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there are no
meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning whether the
district court imposed a reasonable sentence. McCollum was
informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental brief, but
has not done so.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in
this case and have found no meritorious grounds for appeal. The
district court made no significant procedural error at
sentencing, see Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007),
and McCollum has not rebutted the presumption on appeal that his
within-Guidelines sentence is substantively reasonable, see
United States v. Louthian, 756 F.3d 295, 306 (4th Cir.), cert.
denied, 135 S. Ct. 421 (2014). Accordingly, we affirm the
district court’s judgment.
This court requires that counsel inform McCollum, in
writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the
United States for further review. If McCollum requests that a
petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition

-- 2 of 3 --

3
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 McCollum.
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 --