UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-4151
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
TRAMARTIE GRADE, a/k/a Tremartie Grade,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Max O. Cogburn, Jr.,
District Judge. (3:15-cr-00131-MOC-1)
Submitted: September 30, 2016 Decided: October 5, 2016
Before MOTZ, KING, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Chiege O. Kalu Okwara, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Jill Westmoreland Rose, United States Attorney, Anthony J.
Enright, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Tramartie Grade appeals his 92-month sentence following his
guilty plea for unlawfully possessing a firearm, in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012). On appeal, Grade argues that the
district court clearly erred during sentencing when it applied
the attempted murder cross-reference. U.S. Sentencing
Guidelines Manual § 2K2.1(c) (2015). Finding no reversible
error, we affirm.
We review a district court’s factual findings underlying a
cross-reference application for clear error. United States v.
Ashford, 718 F.3d 377, 380 (4th Cir. 2013). The government must
prove the facts underlying a cross-reference by a preponderance
of the evidence. United States v. Davis, 679 F.3d 177, 182 (4th
Cir. 2012).
Grade argues the cross-reference does not apply to his
sentence because: (1) the evidence does not support a finding
that Grade possessed the malice required for attempted murder,
and (2) the facts support a finding of self-defense. Based on
the testimony presented at Grade’s sentencing hearing and the
district court’s credibility determinations, we find no clear
error in the district court’s finding that a preponderance of
the evidence showed Grade had the culpable intent to commit
murder. See 18 U.S.C. § 1111(a) (2012) (requiring malice
aforethought for murder); United States v. Engle, 676 F.3d 405,
2
419-20 (4th Cir. 2012) (requiring government to show defendant
intended to commit crime to prove attempt). Nor does the
testimony of either the Government’s witnesses or Grade support
a finding of self-defense. Thus, the district court did not
clearly err when it applied the attempted murder cross-
reference.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions were adequately presented in the materials before
this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3