US v. Roger Reid


UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed.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]

Download PDF
Appeal: 16-4472 Doc: 31 Filed: 04/11/2017 Pg: 1 of 3 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-4472 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. ROGER EMANUEL REID, Defendant - Appellant.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 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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

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?