United States v. Collins ( 2010 )


Menu:
  •                              UNPUBLISHED
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
    No. 10-4182
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff – Appellee,
    v.
    ANTONIO COLLINS,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
    District of West Virginia, at Charleston.  John T. Copenhaver,
    Jr., District Judge. (2:08-cr-00283-1)
    Submitted:   July 30, 2010                 Decided:   August 10, 2010
    Before TRAXLER, Chief Judge, and NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit
    Judges.
    Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
    Mary Lou Newberger, Federal Public Defender, Jonathan D. Byrne,
    Appellate Counsel, Christian M. Capece, Assistant Federal Public
    Defender, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Charleston,
    West Virginia, for Appellant. Charles T. Miller, United States
    Attorney, Monica L. Dillon, Assistant United States Attorney,
    OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia,
    for Appellee.
    Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
    PER CURIAM:
    Antonio      Collins    pleaded      guilty     to     being     a   felon     in
    possession of a firearm, in violation of 
    28 U.S.C. §§ 922
    (g)(1)
    and    § 924(a)(2).           Pursuant   to     a    plea     agreement,      Collins
    preserved     his    right    to   appeal     the    denial    of     his   motion    to
    suppress evidence of the firearm seized from his person during a
    pat-down     of   his   clothing,      conducted     in     conjunction      with    the
    search of a vehicle in which he was riding as a passenger.                            We
    have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and
    find    no   reversible       error.     Accordingly,         we    affirm    on     the
    reasoning of the district court.               See United States v. Collins,
    
    650 F.Supp.2d 527
       (S.D.W.Va.     2009).       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: 10-4182

Filed Date: 8/10/2010

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021