US v. Roger Anderson


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:96-cr-00059-TDS-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998467035] [09-5089]

Download PDF
US v. Roger Anderson Doc. 0 Case: 09-5089 Document: 19 Date Filed: 11/17/2010 Page: 1 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-5089 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROGER EUGENE ANDERSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:96-cr-00059-TDS-1) Submitted: October 29, 2010 Decided: November 17, 2010 Before WILKINSON, GREGORY, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, Eric D. Placke, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Harry L. Hobgood, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Case: 09-5089 Document: 19 Date Filed: 11/17/2010 Page: 2 PER CURIAM: Roger Eugene Anderson appeals the district court's judgment revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to twenty-four months' imprisonment and thirty-eight months' supervised release based on the finding that he violated the conditions of his release when he used cocaine. the evidence was insufficient to show that he Anderson argues used cocaine. Finding no error, we affirm. This court reviews a district court's judgment revoking supervised release and imposing a term of imprisonment for abuse of discretion. 831 (4th Cir. 1992). United States v. Copley, 978 F.2d 829, To revoke supervised release, a district court need only find a violation of a condition of supervised release by a preponderance of the evidence. 18 U.S.C. 3583(e)(3) (2006); Id. This burden "simply requires the trier of fact to believe that the existence of a fact is more probable than its nonexistence." 631 (4th Cir. 2010) United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, quotation marks omitted). A (internal defendant challenging the sufficiency of the evidence faces a heavy burden. United States v. Beidler, 110 F.3d 1064, 1067 We review factual findings and credibility See United States v. Carothers, In determining whether the this court views the (4th Cir. 1997). determinations for clear error. 337 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir. 2003). evidence in the record is substantial, 2 Case: 09-5089 Document: 19 Date Filed: 11/17/2010 Page: 3 evidence in the light most favorable to the Government. United States v. Burgos, 94 F.3d 849, 862 (4th Cir. 1996) (en banc). We conclude that the district court's factual finding that Anderson used cocaine in violation of a condition of his supervised release was not clearly erroneous. affirm the court's judgment. Accordingly, we 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?