UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-4852
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
JAMES E. GOODE,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern
District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr.,
District Judge. (2:06-cr-00262)
Submitted: January 17, 2008 Decided: January 23, 2008
Before TRAXLER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Carl J. Roncaglione, Jr., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant.
Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Lisa G. Johnston,
Assistant United States Attorney, Huntington, West Virginia, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
James E. Goode pled guilty to receipt of child
pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2) (2000), and was
sentenced to the mandatory minimum term of five years imprisonment.
The court also imposed a ten-year term of supervised release. See
18 U.S.C.A. § 3583(k) (West Supp. 2007). Goode appeals his
sentence on the ground that the advisory guideline range was
incorrectly calculated. We affirm.
The district court adopted the guideline calculation set
out in the presentence report, overruling Goode’s objections and
finding that the guideline range would have been 37-46 months, but
was increased to the statutory minimum term of 60 months under U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5G1.1(b) (2002).* Goode does not
dispute that he was subject to the 60-month minimum term or that
the guideline range was 60 months pursuant to § 5G1.2(b). He
contends that the court should have applied USSG § 2G2.4
(possession of child pornography) instead of § 2G2.2 (trafficking
in child pornography), and erred in making an enhancement for
distribution under subsection (b)(2)(E). Both issues pertain only
to the initial computation of the guideline range before the
application of § 5G1.1(b). We conclude that the district court
correctly determined that Goode’s guideline range was 60 months and
*
Goode’s offense was committed in October 2003. The 2002
Guidelines Manual was applied to avoid ex post facto issues.
- 2 -
sentenced him accordingly.
We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district
court. 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
- 3 -