UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4750
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
OTIS STEFFON JOHNSON,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:13-cr-00008-MOC-1)
Submitted: June 30, 2015 Decided: July 29, 2015
Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Roderick M. Wright, Jr., WRIGHT LAW FIRM OF CHARLOTTE, PLLC,
Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray,
Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Otis Steffon Johnson pled guilty to possession of a firearm
by a convicted felon and was sentenced to 77 months’
imprisonment. On appeal, counsel has filed a brief pursuant to
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), stating that there
are no meritorious grounds for appeal but questioning whether
the district court erred in applying a four-level sentencing
enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual
§ 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) (2013). Although notified of his right to do
so, Johnson has not filed a pro se supplemental brief. Finding
no reversible error, we affirm.
In assessing a challenge to the application of the
Guidelines, “we review [the district court’s] legal conclusions
de novo and its factual findings for clear error.” United
States v. Cox, 744 F.3d 305, 308 (4th Cir. 2014) (defining clear
error). The Guidelines provide for a four-level enhancement if
the defendant “used or possessed any firearm or ammunition in
connection with another felony offense.” USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B).
The enhancement applies where “the firearm . . . facilitated, or
had the potential of facilitating, another felony offense,”
USSG § 2K2.1 cmt. n.14(A), and “regardless of whether a criminal
charge was brought, or a conviction obtained” for the other
offense, id. cmt. n.14(C). The Guidelines further provide that
a firearm is presumed to have the “potential of facilitating
2
another felony offense” when the “firearm is found in close
proximity to drugs, drug-manufacturing materials, or drug-
paraphernalia.” Id. cmt. n.14(B).
Here, the district court found that Johnson possessed or
had control over approximately 94 grams of marijuana and the
bedroom in which the marijuana and firearm were found. The
record contains sufficient evidence, including the testimony of
two detectives involved in the search, to support the district
court’s findings. Thus, the court’s factual findings were not
clearly erroneous. Further, after conducting a de novo review,
we conclude that the district court did not err in applying USSG
§ 2K2.1(b)(6)(B), particularly where the facts adduced at
sentencing established close proximity between the firearm and
the marijuana.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in
this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We
therefore affirm Johnson’s conviction and sentence. This Court
requires that counsel inform Johnson, in writing, of the right
to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further
review. If Johnson requests that a petition be filed, but
counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then
counsel may move in this Court for leave to withdraw from
representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Johnson.
3
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before
this Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
4