US v. David Kohn, Jr., No. 09-4824 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4824 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. DAVID EDWIN KOHN, JR., a/k/a David Johnson, a/k/a Officer David Washington, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Terry L. Wooten, District Judge. (4:07-cr-00645-TLW-1) Submitted: June 24, 2010 Before KING and Circuit Judge. SHEDD, Decided: Circuit Judges, and August 11, 2010 HAMILTON, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William F. Nettles, IV, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Florence, South Carolina; Aileen P. Clare, Research and Writing Specialist, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. Kevin F. McDonald, Acting United States Attorney, Alfred W. Bethea, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Florence, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: David Edwin Kohn, Jr., pled guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to two counts of use of a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (2006). Kohn was convicted of violating 18 U.S.C. § Because 924(c), the presentence report ( PSR ) calculated his sentence in accordance with U.S. (2006), Sentencing which provides Guidelines that the Manual ( USSG ) Guidelines § 2K2.4(b) sentence is the minimum term of imprisonment required by statute in Kohn s case, ten years to life imprisonment on the first count of conviction and twenty-five years to life imprisonment on the second. The Government moved for a downward departure, USSG § 5K1.1, p.s., based on Kohn s substantial assistance. granted the Government s months imprisonment. motion and sentenced Kohn appeals his sentence. The court Kohn to 274 Finding no error, we affirm. On appeal, Kohn argues that the district court should have considered the § 3553(a) sentencing factors, and not merely the value of his assistance, in determining the extent of the departure below the statutory minimum sentence. Kohn acknowledges that this court has previously rejected a similar challenge, see United States v. Hood, 556 F.3d 226 (4th Cir. 2009), thus establishing circuit authority binding on subsequent panels. United States v. Collins, 415 F.3d 304, 311 (4th Cir. 2 2005) ( A decision of a panel of this court becomes the law of the circuit and is binding on other panels unless it is overruled by a subsequent en banc opinion of this court or a superseding contrary decision of the Supreme Court. ) (internal quotation marks omitted). Therefore, this claim fails. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court and deny the Government s motion for summary affirmance as moot. legal before We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions the court are adequately and argument presented would not in aid the the materials 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.
