US v. David Stover, Jr.
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:16-cr-00030-IMK-MJA-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. .. [16-4744]
Pg: 1 of 3
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
DAVID KEITH STOVER, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg.
Irene M. Keeley,
District Judge. (1:16-cr-00030-IMK-MJA-1)
March 14, 2017
March 16, 2017
Before FLOYD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
L. Richard Walker, Senior Litigator, Clarksburg, West Virginia;
Kristen M. Leddy, Research & Writing Specialist, FEDERAL PUBLIC
DEFENDER OFFICE, Martinsburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. Betsy
Steinfeld Jividen, Acting United States Attorney, David J. Perri,
Assistant United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Pg: 2 of 3
David Keith Stover, Jr., pled guilty to possession of firearms
by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012).
Sentencing Guidelines range and sentenced Stover to 36 months’
On appeal, Stover contends that the court erred in
See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 3E1.1
Because Stover did not object to the court’s decision not to
grant the acceptance-of-responsibility reduction, our review is
for plain error.
United States v. Strieper, 666 F.3d 288, 292
(4th Cir. 2012); see Henderson v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 1121,
Guidelines, a defendant is eligible for a reduction of his offense
level if he “clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility for
USSG § 3E1.1.
When determining whether a defendant
voluntarily terminated or withdrew from criminal conduct.
§ 3E1.1 cmt. n.1(B); see United States v. Dugger, 485 F.3d 236,
240 (4th Cir. 2007) (“The decision to grant an acceptance-ofresponsibility reduction often depends on the actions of the
defendant following his or her arrest or plea.”).
Pg: 3 of 3
Here, Stover did not terminate or withdraw from criminal
conduct after his arrest.
Instead, he twice drove with a revoked
license, once while intoxicated.
Stover avers that a reduction
because this new criminal conduct was unrelated to the offense
We have never adopted such a rule, and we decline to
recognize one here.
The court warned Stover that engaging in any
disqualify him for the acceptance-of-responsibility reduction.
Under these circumstances, we conclude that the district court did
not plainly err in declining to grant the reduction.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.
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?