US v. Roger Reid

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 3:15-cr-00090-FDW-DSC-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000059564]. [16-4472]

Appeal: 16-4472

Doc: 31

Filed: 04/11/2017

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4472

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
ROGER EMANUEL REID,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:15-cr-00090-FDW-DSC-1)

Submitted:

March 31, 2017

Decided:

April 11, 2017

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Parke Davis, Acting Executive Director, Ann L. Hester,
FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDERS OF WESTERN NORTH CAROLINA, INC.,
Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Jill Westmoreland
Rose, United States Attorney, Anthony J. Enright, Assistant
United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-4472

Doc: 31

Filed: 04/11/2017

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Roger Emanuel Reid pled guilty to knowingly and unlawfully
possessing

a

firearm

after

having

been

convicted

of

a

crime

punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year, in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012).

He appeals from his

51-month sentence, alleging that the district court erred by
enhancing

his

sentence

by

four-levels

under

U.S.

Sentencing

Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) (2015) because he possessed
the firearm at issue in connection with another felony.

We

affirm.
We review any criminal sentence for reasonableness under a
deferential

abuse-of-discretion

States,

US.

district

552

court

38,

41

standard.

(2007).

properly

Gall

v.

United

In

considering

whether

a

Sentencing

Guidelines

imposed

a

enhancement, we review a district court’s factual findings for
clear error and its legal determinations de novo.
v.

Chandia,

675

F.3d

329,

337

(4th

Cir.

United States

2012).

Whether

a

defendant possessed a firearm in connection with another felony
is a factual question we review for clear error.
v. Jenkins, 566 F.3d 160, 163 (4th Cir. 2009).

United States
We will find a

court’s factual findings clearly erroneous only if we are “left
with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been
committed.”

United States v. Crawford, 734 F.3d 339, 342 (4th

Cir. 2013) (internal quotation marks omitted).
2

“Where there are

Appeal: 16-4472

Doc: 31

Filed: 04/11/2017

Pg: 3 of 3

two permissible views of the evidence, the factfinder’s choice
between them cannot be clearly erroneous.”

Anderson v. City of

Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 574 (1985).
Here,

police
Police

warrant.

entered
found

possession

of

various

Reid’s

Reid
items

home

there
of

pursuant

with

drug

the

to

a

firearm

search
and

paraphernalia.

in

Reid

admitted that he had been dealing cocaine from the home, which
was equipped with a surveillance camera, for months.
Reid
applying

argues
the

trafficking
Reid’s home.
the

appeal

that

§ 2K2.1(b)(6)(B)

offense

was

the

district

enhancement

ongoing

at

the

court

erred

because

time

no

police

in

drug

entered

We hold that the district court’s application of

enhancement

underlying

on

is

evidence

not

clearly

fully

erroneous,

supports

and

application

that

the

of

the

enhancement.
Accordingly, we affirm.

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.
AFFIRMED

3