UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4177
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL ALLEN KENNEY,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston. Joseph Robert Goodwin,
District Judge. (2:00-cr-00104)
Submitted: October 18, 2006 Decided: November 14, 2006
Before TRAXLER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Mary Lou Newberger, Federal Public Defender, Jonathan D. Byrne,
Appellate Counsel, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant.
Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Joanne Vella Kirby,
Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Michael Allen Kenney was charged with violating
supervised release by committing a crime. Specifically, his
probation officer alleged that Kenney violated release by operating
a clandestine methamphetamine laboratory in Putnam County, West
Virginia. Kenney denied the charge. Following a hearing, the
district court found by a preponderance of the evidence that Kenney
had violated release as charged. The court revoked Kenney’s
release and imposed a sentence of twenty-four months. Kenney
appeals. We affirm.
Kenney contends that the district court erred by finding
by a preponderance of the evidence, see 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3)
(2000), that Kenney participated in the manufacture or attempted
manufacture of methamphetamine. Testimony at the hearing revealed
that state police officers who responded to a trailer in Putnam
County noticed a strong smell of methamphetamine emanating from
inside the trailer. Officers discovered inside the trailer
precursor chemicals and paraphernalia used in the manufacture of
methamphetamine. When officers announced their presence, Kenney
fled out the trailer’s back door. Finally, Kenney’s girlfriend,
Jessica Searls, gave a written statement that she and Kenney were
at the trailer so that he could manufacture methamphetamine. We
conclude on the basis of this evidence that the district court did
- 2 -
not abuse its discretion in finding that Kenney had violated a term
of his release as charged.
We accordingly affirm. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in
the materials before us and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -