Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
No. 11-5126
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.
Terry L. Wooten, District Judge.
(4:08-cr-01251-TLW-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
June 7, 2012
PER CURIAM:
David
ninety-month
Brandon
sentence
Watson
following
appeals
his
his
conviction
conditional
guilty
and
plea,
drug
trafficking
crime,
924(c)(1)(A) (2006).
in
violation
of
18
U.S.C.
the
district
court
erred
in
denying
the
motion
to
Finding no error, we
affirm.
Both Watson and counsel question the district courts
denial
of
the
motion
to
suppress
the
drugs
and
firearms
considering
the
district
courts
denial
of
motion
to
United
When the
Id.
generally
implicate
the
Fourth
Amendment,
and
thus
an
inquiry.
2001).
warrantless entry.
that
evidence
of
illegal
activity
is
present
and
States v. Turner, 650 F.2d 526, 528 (4th Cir. 1981) (enumerating
additional factors for determining exigency).
Upon review, we conclude that the district court did
not
err
in
finding
that
exigent
circumstances
justified
the
To
weigh
suppress.
their
credibility
during
pre-trial
motion
to
Cir.
2008)
district
(internal
court
did
quotation
not
err
marks
in
omitted).
denying
Thus,
Watsons
the
motion
to
next
questions
whether
the
district
court
complied
with
colloquy
that
minor
and
any
Rule
11
omissions
U.S.
725,
732
(1993)
in
conducting
by
the
the
court
did
plea
not
(detailing
plain
error
standard);
United States v. General, 278 F.3d 389, 393 (4th Cir. 2002)
(providing standard of review).
not err in finding that Watsons guilty plea was knowing and
voluntary.
Finally, counsel questions whether Watsons sentence
was reasonable.
that
the
district
court
did
not
commit
any
significant
Once
the
substantive
reasonableness
of
the
sentence,
Id.
United States
The
when
States
v.
(internal
conclude
that
substantive
measured
against
Montes-Pineda,
quotation
the
error
in
445
marks
district
the
F.3d
3553(a)
375,
omitted).
court
Upon
committed
sentencing
Watson
379
no
to
factors.
(4th
Cir.
review,
we
procedural
or
ninety
months
This court
the
Supreme
review.
If
Watson
Court
requests
counsel
believes
that
counsel
may
in
move
representation.
of
such
this
the
that
United
a
petition
petition
court
for
States
would
leave
to
be
be
for
further
filed,
but
frivolous,
withdraw
from
before
the
court
and
argument
would
not
aid
the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED