Court: Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; March 16, 2004; Federal Appellate Court
A direct appeal has been filed concerning a criminal judgment and commitment order against Ashley Turner, who was convicted in 1998 of multiple offenses, including bank fraud and false statements, and was sentenced to thirty-four months in prison, followed by five years of supervised release. Following her release, a warrant was issued on April 17, 2003, for violating her supervised release conditions, specifically for impersonating a licensed professional and traveling outside the judicial district without permission.
During an evidentiary hearing, Turner admitted to the travel violations but contested the impersonation charge. Witnesses, including Sandra James from the Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance and Dr. Robert Smith from the Hamilton County school system, testified that Turner misrepresented herself as an attorney in official capacities. The district court found her guilty of both violations and revoked her supervised release, imposing a twelve-month term of incarceration. Turner’s counsel subsequently filed a motion to withdraw from the appeal, submitting a 'no merit' brief in accordance with legal protocols.
Turner testified in her defense, refuting the claims of witnesses and suggesting bias against her. The court determined that Turner had violated a Tennessee statute, specifically identifying at least one of the following: Tenn. Code Ann. 39-16-302 (impersonation), Tenn. Code Ann. 23-3-108 (misrepresentation), or Tenn. Code Ann. 23-3-103 (unauthorized practice of law). As a result, the court revoked her supervised release and sentenced her to twelve months in prison.
On appeal, Turner's counsel presented three issues for review but acknowledged their lack of merit. First, they argued that the district court may have erred in revoking her supervised release and imposing a sentence at the lower end of the advisory guideline range, which is reviewed for abuse of discretion. The record indicated that her first violation was a Grade B violation, necessitating revocation. The appeal noted that without an objection to the sentence, only plain error would be reviewed, and the court found no error.
Second, counsel contended that the evidence was insufficient to support the finding that Turner committed a crime under Tennessee law. However, the court established that the violation finding was supported by a preponderance of the credible evidence.
Finally, counsel argued that the United States Attorney should have provided Turner with a list of witnesses prior to the hearing. However, it was noted that in non-capital cases, a defendant is not entitled to advance notice of government witnesses.
No additional errors were identified, leading to the conclusion that the appeal lacked merit. The motion for counsel to withdraw was granted, and the district court’s judgment was affirmed.
