US v. Craig Ford
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. CRAIG FORD, Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr., Senior District Judge. (5:08-cr-00032-FPS-JES-1)
July 23, 2009
August 11, 2009
Before KING and Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Brendan S. Leary, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellant. Sharon L. Potter, United States Attorney, David J. Perri, Randolph J. Bernard, Assistant United States Attorneys, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM: Craig Ford appeals his sentence following his guilty plea to being a convicted felon in possession of ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). On appeal, Ford
argues that the district court procedurally erred in calculating his guideline sentencing range because Ford was entitled to the sporting and collection exception pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual (USSG) § 2K2.1(b)(2) (2008). This court reviews a sentence for reasonableness under an abuse-of-discretion standard. Gall v. United States, 552 This review requires
U.S. 38, __, 128 S. Ct. 586, 597 (2007).
appellate consideration of both the procedural and substantive reasonableness of a sentence. sentence is procedurally Id. In determining whether a this court must assess
whether the district court properly calculated the defendant's advisory sentencing guideline court range. Id. applied In the assessing Guidelines, whether this a
reviews the court's factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. 522, 527 (4th Cir. 2006). The defendant bears the burden of proving by a United States v. Allen, 446 F.3d
preponderance of the evidence that he is entitled to a specified reduction in his guideline sentencing level. See United Section
States v. Abdi, 342 F.3d 313, 317 (4th Cir. 2003). 2
2K2.1(b)(2) of the Guidelines provides for a sentencing level reduction when the ammunition "solely in question lawful is possessed by a or
collection" and the defendant did not otherwise unlawfully use that ammunition. Given that Ford lacked a hunting license and
told investigating officers that he intended to hunt deer, which would not be legal did that to not he hunt for another by seven months, that for the Ford
district failed to
sporting purposes. denying a USSG §
Therefore, the district court did not err in 2K2.1(b)(2) reduction in Ford's guideline
sentencing level. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. 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.
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?