Said Omari pled guilty pursuant to a plea agreement to
conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute heroin, ecstasy,
and 500 grams or more of cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C.
§ 846 (2006) (“Count One”), and possession of a firearm during
and in relation to a drug trafficking crime, in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) (2006) (“Count Three”). The district
court sentenced Omari to seventy-two months’ imprisonment on
Count One and sixty months’ imprisonment on Count Three, to be
served consecutively. Omari’s sentence fell within his advisory
guidelines range. Omari timely noted his appeal.
On appeal, counsel for Omari has filed a brief
pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). In his
Anders brief, counsel suggests that the district court erred in
denying his request for a variance sentence.
This court reviews a sentence imposed by a district
court under a deferential abuse of discretion standard. Gall v.
United States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007); United States v. Evans,
526 F.3d 155, 161 (4th Cir. 2008). In reviewing a sentence, we
must first ensure that the district court committed no
procedural error. Gall, 552 U.S. at 51. If we find no
Omari, informed of his right to file a pro se supplemental
brief, has not done so.