United States v. Smith , 193 F. App'x 228 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4128
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMES CARMICHAEL SMITH, JR., a/k/a Tiger,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, Senior District
Judge. (7:05-cr-00072-jct)
Submitted: July 24, 2006 Decided: August 1, 2006
Before MOTZ and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit
Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Paul G. Beers, GLENN, FELDMANN, DARBY & GOODLATTE, Roanoke,
Virginia, for Appellant. John L. Brownlee, United States Attorney,
Edward A. Lustig, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke,
Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
James Carmichael Smith, Jr., pled guilty to being a felon
in possession of a firearm reserving his right to contest the
district court’s decision to deny his motion to suppress the
evidence recovered from his person. On appeal, he contests the
denial of the suppression motion. For the reasons that follow, we
affirm.
We review a district court’s factual findings underlying
a motion to suppress for clear error and its legal determinations
de novo. Ornelas v. United States, 517 U.S. 690, 699 (1996);
United States v. Rusher, 966 F.2d 868, 873 (4th Cir. 1992). When
a suppression motion has been denied, this court construes the
evidence in the light most favorable to the government. United
States v. Seidman, 156 F.3d 542, 547 (4th Cir. 1998). Construing
the facts as required, we find no reversible error. Accordingly we
affirm Smith’s conviction. We dispense with oral argument as the
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the
materials before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 2 -