US v. Darryl Southern, No. 08-4991 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08-4991 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DARRYL MCCORMICK SOUTHERN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:08-cr-00006-WO-1) Submitted: June 18, 2009 Decided: June 22, 2009 Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, Gregory Davis, Senior Litigator, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Robert A.J. Lang, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Darryl McCormick Southern appeals from his 188-month sentence imposed pursuant to his guilty plea to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. the decision to run his On appeal, Southern argues that sentence consecutively to the state sentence he was then serving was unreasonable and constituted an abuse of discretion. Under We affirm. U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5G1.3(c) (2007), the district court possessed the discretion to run the imposed sentence concurrently, Southern s partially prior concurrently, undischarged term or consecutively to of imprisonment. In choosing to run the sentence consecutively, the court considered the undisputed advisory Guidelines range of 180-210 months in prison, the 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (2006) sentencing factors, the fact that Southern s undischarged state sentence was the result of a series of probation violations, the fact that the state and federal sentences were Southern s extensive criminal history. not related, and In fact, the court noted that there was a significant argument to be made that an appropriate sentence would require an upward departure from the Guidelines, Southern s but the cooperation, court age, would be run consecutively. declined and the to fact so that depart, his given sentence We find no abuse of discretion and 2 hold that the decision to run Southern s sentence consecutively to his undischarged state sentence was reasonable. Accordingly, we affirm. 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.
