US v. James E. Goode

Filing 920080123

Opinion

Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-4852 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JAMES E. GOODE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr., District Judge. (2:06-cr-00262) Submitted: January 17, 2008 Decided: January 23, 2008 Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carl J. Roncaglione, Jr., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Lisa G. Johnston, Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: James E. Goode pled guilty to receipt of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2252(a)(2) (2000), and was sentenced to the mandatory minimum term of five years imprisonment. The court also imposed a ten-year term of supervised release. 18 U.S.C.A. 3583(k) (West Supp. 2007). See Goode appeals his sentence on the ground that the advisory guideline range was incorrectly calculated. We affirm. The district court adopted the guideline calculation set out in the presentence report, overruling Goode's objections and finding that the guideline range would have been 37-46 months, but was increased to the statutory minimum term of 60 months under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual 5G1.1(b) (2002).* Goode does not dispute that he was subject to the 60-month minimum term or that the guideline range was 60 months pursuant to 5G1.2(b). contends that the court should have applied USSG He 2G2.4 (possession of child pornography) instead of 2G2.2 (trafficking in child pornography), and erred in making an enhancement for distribution under subsection (b)(2)(E). Both issues pertain only to the initial computation of the guideline range before the application of 5G1.1(b). We conclude that the district court correctly determined that Goode's guideline range was 60 months and Goode's offense was committed in October 2003. The 2002 Guidelines Manual was applied to avoid ex post facto issues. - 2 - * sentenced him accordingly. We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district court. 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 - 3 -

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?