US v. Lokheim Campbell
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 4:15-cr-00487-BHH-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [16-4218]
Pg: 1 of 4
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
LOKHEIM JERALLE CAMPBELL,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Florence.
Bruce H. Hendricks, District
September 22, 2016
October 13, 2016
Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
William F. Nettles, IV, Assistant Federal Public Defender,
Florence, South Carolina, for Appellant. William N. Nettles,
United States Attorney, Alfred W. Bethea, Jr., Assistant United
States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 4
Lokheim Jeralle Campbell pled guilty to possession of a
firearm by a convicted felony, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012), and
was sentenced to 120 months in prison.
He now appeals, raising
negotiating the sale of the drugs, Campbell pulled out a handgun
to rob Lowery.
When Lowery began to flee, Campbell fired at
Lowery several times, striking him once in each foot.
shell casings were recovered from the scene.
Lowery’s probation officer applied the cross-reference for
attempted first degree murder and assigned base offense level
See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 2A2.1(a)(1) (2015).
serious bodily injury, USSG § 2A2.1(b)(1)(B).
Three levels were
subtracted based on acceptance of responsibility, USSG § 3E1.1.
category was III, and his Guidelines range was 151-188 months.
He was statutorily subject to a maximum term of ten years in
See 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(2) (2012).
Guidelines range was 120 months.
See USSG § 5G1.1(a).
Pg: 3 of 4
cross-reference, arguing that he intended to rob but not to kill
The district court overruled the objection.
Campbell contends that the district court erred when it
applied the cross-reference for attempted first degree murder.
When evaluating Guidelines calculations, we review the district
court’s legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings for
United States v. Cox, 744 F.3d 305, 308 (4th Cir.
The Guidelines provide for a base offense level of 33 “if
the object of the offense would have constituted first degree
§ 2A2.1(a)(1) & cmt. n.1.
Section 1111, in turn, defines first
degree murder as “the unlawful killing of a human being with
malice aforethought” — that is, “[e]very murder perpetrated by
. . . willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing;
or committed in the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate,
any . . . robbery.”
18 U.S.C. § 1111(a).
Thus, a defendant
premeditated or committed during the course of a felony, such as
See United States v. Morales-Machuca, 546 F.3d 13, 22
(“18 U.S.C. § 1111 was intended to adopt the felony murder rule,
and for a stated felony the malice element is satisfied by the
Pg: 4 of 4
intent to commit the unlawful felony” (internal quotation marks
We conclude that the district court properly applied the
While attempting to rob Lowery, Campbell shot
killed Lowery during the course of the robbery; had Lowery died,
Campbell would have been guilty of felony murder.
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the
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?