US v. Derrick Rushing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:16-cr-00005-JAB-1. Copies to all parties and the district court. . [16-4406]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
DERRICK ANTWON RUSHING,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,
Senior District Judge. (1:16-cr-00005-JAB-1)
February 2, 2017
Before MOTZ and
February 9, 2017
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, Kathleen A. Gleason,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina,
Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Robert A.
J. Lang, Assistant United States Attorney, Alanna M. Jereb,
Third Year Law Student, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
Derrick Antwon Rushing appeals from the 50-month sentence
imposed following his guilty plea for possession of a firearm by
Rushing disputes the district court’s application of a
specifically, felony sale of cocaine.
We review the district court’s factual determinations in
States v. Strieper, 666 F.3d 288, 292 (4th Cir. 2012).
§ 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) (2015).
The “in connection with” element is
satisfied “if the firearm facilitated, or had the potential of
protection or to embolden the actor.”
United States v. Jenkins,
Where the other felony is a drug trafficking offense,
a firearm “found in close proximity to drugs, drug-manufacturing
potential of facilitating another felony offense.”
§ 2K2.1 cmt. n.14(B)).
Pg: 3 of 3
This element is not satisfied, however,
where the presence of the firearm is “the result of accident or
United States v. Blount, 337 F.3d 404, 411 (4th
Cir. 2003) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Rushing contends that there is no evidence that the firearm
was used in connection with the sale of cocaine because the
firearm was only discovered two days after his last known drug
sale, and there is no proof that he possessed the firearm at the
residence when drug transactions occurred.
connection with drug trafficking.
Based on the record
The gun was recovered in the
same room as drug paraphernalia and nearby drug residue, and
See Jenkins, 566 F.3d at 162-63; USSG § 2K2.1 cmt.
Therefore, the district court’s decision to apply the
§ 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement was not clearly erroneous.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
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?