US v. Jerry Kerns, No. 08-4395 (4th Cir. 2008)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-4395 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JERRY WAYNE KERNS, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., Chief District Judge. (3:07-cr-00018-RJC-1) Submitted: December 16, 2008 Decided: December 22, 2008 Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. David L. Hitchens, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID L. HITCHENS, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Jerry Wayne Kerns appeals the seventy-month sentence imposed after he pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). Kerns counsel has California, 386 meritorious issues filed U.S. 738 for a brief (1967), appeal pursuant stating but to that Anders there questioning are whether v. no the district court erred by applying a four-level enhancement under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual ( USSG ) § 2K2.1(b)(6) (2005), for possession of a weapon in connection with another felony offense. We affirm. Counsel questions whether the district court erred by enhancing Kerns offense level under USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6). In order for the enhancement to apply, the district court must find both that a firearm was used (or that the defendant possessed . . . the firearm expecting that it would be used) and that such use was in connection with another felony offense. United States v. Garnett, 243 F.3d 824, 828 (4th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Our review of the record convinces us that the district court did not clearly err in applying the enhancement in USSG § 2K2.1(b)(6). See id. (stating standard of review). In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record for any meritorious issues for 2 appeal and have found none. Thus, we requires affirm that the district counsel inform court s his judgment. client, in This writing, court of his right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further filed, review. but If counsel the client believes requests that such that a a petition petition would be 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 the client. 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
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
