United States v. Raymond Lee Prayear, JR., 96 F.3d 1440, 4th Cir. (1996)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government DocsUnited States v. Raymond Lee Prayear, JR., 96 F.3d 1440, 4th Cir. (1996)
Uploaded by
Scribd Government Docs96 F.
3d 1440
NOTICE: Fourth Circuit Local Rule 36(c) states that citation
of unpublished dispositions is disfavored except for establishing
res judicata, estoppel, or the law of the case and requires
service of copies of cited unpublished dispositions of the Fourth
Circuit.
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Raymond Lee PRAYEAR, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
No. 96-4045.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Aug. 22, 1996.
Decided Sept. 12, 1996.
Howard G. Higgins, Jr., Morgantown, West Virginia, for Appellant.
William D. Wilmoth, United States Attorney, Sam G. Nazzaro, Assistant
United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Before RUSSELL, HALL, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
OPINION
PER CURIAM
1
Raymond Lee Prayear, Jr., pled guilty to conspiracy to possess crack cocaine
with intent to distribute, 21 U.S.C.A. 846 (West Supp.1996). He was
sentenced to a term of 151 months imprisonment. He appeals his sentence on
two grounds which were not raised in the district court and are without merit.
Finding no plain error, we affirm his sentence.
Prayear first contends that his sentence is disproportionate to the gravity of his
offense and thus violates the Eighth Amendment. Because his sentence is less
than life without parole, an extended proportionality review is not necessary.
United States v. Thomas, 900 F.2d 37, 39 (4th Cir.1990). We have no difficulty
in finding that Prayear's sentence is not disproportionate to his offense.
3
Next, Prayear argues that the 100-to-1 statutory sentencing ratio for cocaine
and crack offenses violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fifth
Amendment because of its disparate impact on black defendants. This claim
has been considered and rejected before. United States v. Fisher, 58 F.3d 96, 99
(4th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 64 U.S.L.W. 3270 (U.S. Oct. 10, 1995)
(No. 95-5923).
The sentence is accordingly affirmed. 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
You might also like
- No ratings yetUnited States v. Raymond Richard Stephenson, A/K/A "Anthony McCurvin A/K/A "Andrew McCurvin Antoinette McCurvin A/K/A "Antoinette Glenn" Dennis Johnson, A/K/A "Shabba" Michael Wright, A/K/A "Eric Seymour," A/K/A "Thomas Ellis," A/K/A "Mikey" Arline Santiago, A/K/A "Leopol Dina Cabrera" Cornelio Rojas Acevedo, A/K/A "Oley," A/a/k "Nelson Santana" Marcus Anderson Zedrick Bozemon, A/K/A "Smiley" Donald Bellamy, A/K/A "Boo Boo" Dennis Braithwaite, A/K/A "Den Den" Vastie Jones, A/K/A "Pirate" Daniel Rutherford, A/K/A "Silky" Timothy Gainey, A/K/A "Timmy" Denis Chriss Brown, A/K/A "Wiley" Darryl Miles Reginald Miles, A/K/A "Monkey" Vincent Phillips, A/K/A "Vinnie Phillips" Michael Tolson, A/K/A "Money Mike" Richard Whitfield, A/K/A "Red" Lisa Williams, A/K/A Lis and Michael Williams, A/K/A "Bub," Kenneth Anthony, A/K/A "b.a.," A/K/A "Babus" Robert Martin Earl Knight, A/K/A "Big Earl" James Lang, A/K/A "Jimmy" and Andrew Knight, 99 F.3d 401, 2d Cir. (1995)5 pages
