US v. Jason Michael Brown
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:14-cr-00167-MOC-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [16-4306]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
JASON MICHAEL BROWN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:14-cr-00167-MOC-1)
March 14, 2017
March 16, 2017
Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John Parke Davis, Interim Executive Director,
FEDERAL DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA,
Carolina, for Appellant.
Amy Elizabeth Ray,
States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Jared P. Martin,
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Jason Michael Brown appeals his conviction and sentence of
(2012), and possession of material containing child pornography,
California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), concluding that there are no
district court committed a procedural error by applying a fivelevel sentencing enhancement for pattern of activity.
McCoy, 804 F.3d 349, 351 (4th Cir. 2015) (quoting Gall v. United
States, 552 U.S. 38, 41 (2007)), cert. denied, 137 S. Ct. 320
This review entails appellate consideration of both the
procedural and substantive reasonableness of the sentence.
552 U.S. at 51.
In assessing the district court’s calculation of
the Guidelines range, we review its legal conclusions de novo and
its factual findings for clear error.
United States v. Cox, 744
F.3d 305, 308 (4th Cir. 2014).
Based on a review of the record, we conclude the district
court did not clearly err in crediting the child victim’s interview
statements in determining that she had been abused more than once.
Pg: 3 of 3
Furthermore, we have reviewed the record and conclude that the
Guidelines as advisory rather than mandatory, gave the parties an
opportunity to argue for an appropriate sentence, considered the
18 U.S.C. § 3353(a) factors, selected a sentence not based on
clearly erroneous facts, and sufficiently explained the chosen
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the entire record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
requires that counsel inform Brown, in writing, of the right to
petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review.
If Brown requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes
that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in
this court for leave to withdraw from representation.
motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Brown.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this
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?