United States v. Darrell McClure , 639 F. App'x 201 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                               UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 15-4635
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff - Appellee,
    v.
    DARRELL DARNELL MCCLURE, a/k/a Oink,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
    District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles,
    District Judge. (1:06-cr-00232-CCE-1)
    Submitted:   April 29, 2016                   Decided:   May 6, 2016
    Before DUNCAN and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
    Circuit Judge.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, Eric D. Placke, First
    Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina,
    for Appellant.    Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Kyle D.
    Pousson, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North
    Carolina, for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Darrell   Darnell          McClure      appeals        the    district       court’s
    judgment revoking his supervised release and imposing 25 months’
    imprisonment       and    30    months’         supervised      release.         On   appeal,
    McClure     contends      that       the    district       court       clearly     erred   by
    finding that he committed a Grade B violation of the terms of
    his supervised release by possessing a firearm and that, based
    on this error, his sentence is unreasonable.                          We affirm.
    We review a district court’s judgment revoking supervised
    release for an abuse of discretion and its factual findings for
    clear error.        United States v. Padgett, 
    788 F.3d 370
    , 373 (4th
    Cir.), cert. denied, 
    136 S. Ct. 494
    (2015).                           The district court
    need only find a violation of a condition of supervised release
    by   a    preponderance        of    the   evidence.           18   U.S.C.    § 3583(e)(3)
    (2012); 
    Padgett, 788 F.3d at 374
    .                       We have reviewed the record
    and conclude that the district court did not clearly err in
    relying on the testimony of multiple law enforcement officers
    who observed McClure on the evening in question to find by a
    preponderance of the evidence that McClure possessed a firearm.
    Because our conclusion forecloses the sole argument that
    McClure offers in support of his claim that his sentence is
    unreasonable,       and    because         we    discern       no   plain    error    in   the
    district      court’s     sentence          within       the    Sentencing       Guidelines
    policy     statement      range      or    its       supporting     explanation,      United
    2
    States   v.    Webb,    
    738 F.3d 638
    ,    640-42    (4th    Cir.   2013),   we
    conclude that McClure’s sentence is reasonable.
    Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment.                     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
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 15-4635

Citation Numbers: 639 F. App'x 201

Filed Date: 5/6/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 1/13/2023