United States v. White , 404 F. App'x 757 ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                             UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-4278
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    BRANDEN ALTOMORRE WHITE,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
    District of Virginia, at Charlottesville.    Norman K. Moon,
    Senior District Judge. (3:09-cr-00021-nkm-1)
    Submitted:   November 15, 2010            Decided:   December 10, 2010
    Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Larry W. Shelton, Federal Public Defender, Frederick T. Heblich,
    Jr.,   Assistant   Federal  Public   Defender,  Charlottesville,
    Virginia, for Appellant.     Timothy J. Heaphy, United States
    Attorney, Ronald M. Huber, Assistant United States Attorney,
    Joseph D. Platania, Special Assistant United States Attorney,
    Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Branden Altomorre White pled guilty to possession of a
    firearm    by        an     unlawful       user   of     a    controlled       substance,      in
    violation       of     
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(3)            (2006).     He    reserved      the
    right to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion to
    suppress.       We affirm.
    In reviewing the district court’s ruling on a motion
    to suppress, this court reviews the district court’s factual
    findings for clear error, and its legal determinations de novo.
    United States v. Cain, 
    524 F.3d 477
    , 481 (4th Cir. 2008).                                      The
    facts     are     reviewed         “in      the       light     most    favorable       to    the
    prevailing party below.”                    United States v. Jamison, 
    509 F.3d 623
    , 628 (4th Cir. 2007).                   Our review of the record leads us to
    conclude that the district court did not err in denying White’s
    motion to suppress.
    Accordingly,              we     affirm          White’s    conviction.            We
    dispense        with        oral   argument       because        the    facts     and        legal
    contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the
    court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
    AFFIRMED
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 10-4278

Citation Numbers: 404 F. App'x 757

Judges: Niemeyer, Per Curiam, Shedd, Wilkinson

Filed Date: 12/10/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/3/2023