United States v. Thompson , 180 F. App'x 426 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4695
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RAMON LEE THOMPSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior
District Judge. (CR-04-44)
Submitted: April 26, 2006 Decided: May 12, 2006
Before WILLIAMS and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M.
Hayes, Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Pursuant to his guilty plea, Ramon Lee Thompson was
convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in
violation of 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 922(g)(1), 924 (West 2000 & Supp.
2005), and conspiracy to make false statements in connection with
the acquisition of firearms, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A.
§ 922(a)(6), 371 (West 2000 & Supp. 2005). The district court
sentenced Thompson to concurrent terms of fifty-two months in
prison on each offense. Thompson timely appeals his sentence,
contending that the district court erred by denying his request for
a two-level downward adjustment under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines
Manual (USSG) § 3E1.1 (2004) for acceptance of responsibility. We
affirm Thompson’s sentence.
The district court determined that a downward adjustment
for acceptance of responsibility was not warranted because Thompson
tested positive for marijuana use while he was on release pending
sentencing. We find no clear error in this ruling. See USSG
§ 3E1.1, cmt. (n.1(b)); United States v. Kise, 369 F.3d 766, 771
(4th Cir. 2004) (providing standard); United States v. Ceccarani,
98 F.3d 126, 130-31 (3d Cir. 1996) (upholding denial of acceptance
of responsibility reduction based on new unrelated criminal
conduct).
Accordingly, we affirm Thompson’s sentence. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
- 2 -
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -