Filed: Feb. 28, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-4590 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMIE MICHELLE BOOMER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CR-01-33-FO) Submitted: February 13, 2002 Decided: February 28, 2002 Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per cur
Summary: UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-4590 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMIE MICHELLE BOOMER, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis- trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (CR-01-33-FO) Submitted: February 13, 2002 Decided: February 28, 2002 Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curi..
More
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-4590
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMIE MICHELLE BOOMER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern Dis-
trict of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District
Judge. (CR-01-33-FO)
Submitted: February 13, 2002 Decided: February 28, 2002
Before WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. John Stuart Bruce, United States Attorney, Christine W.
Dean, Assistant United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Assistant
United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Jamie Michelle Boomer appeals her conviction, in the wake of
her guilty plea pursuant to a written plea agreement, to one count
of conspiring to distribute methamphetamine. See 21 U.S.C.A. §§
841, 846 (West 1999 & Supp. 2001). The only issue Boomer raises on
appeal is that § 841 is unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v.
New Jersey,
530 U.S. 466 (2000), a claim previously considered and
rejected by this Court in United States v. McAllister,
272 F.3d
228, 231-33 (4th Cir. 2001). Accordingly, we affirm Boomer’s
conviction and sentence and dispense with oral argument because the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the mate-
rials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
2