US v. Jovan McLaughlin, No. 16-4405 (4th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 16-4405 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. JOVAN MARQUELL MCLAUGHLIN, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Charlotte. Robert J. Conrad, Jr., District Judge. (3:08-cr-00147-RJC-1) Submitted: January 26, 2017 Decided: February 7, 2017 Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Roderick G. Davis, LAW OFFICE Charlotte, North Carolina, for Rose, United States Attorney, States Attorney, Asheville, North OF RODERICK G. DAVIS, PLLC, Appellant. Jill Westmoreland Amy E. Ray, Assistant United Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Jovan Marquell McLaughlin appeals the judgment revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to 12 months imprisonment. On appeal, McLaughlin alleges that the district court erred by denying his motion to continue his revocation hearing so that he could receive a competency hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a) (2012). We For the reasons that follow, we affirm. review for abuse of denial of a continuance. discretion the district court’s United States v. Williams, 445 F.3d 724, 738-39 (4th Cir. 2006). Whether reasonable cause exists to hold a hearing under § 4241(a) “is a question left to the sound discretion of the district court.” 708 F.3d 583, 592 (4th Cir. 2013). by the district revocation § 4241. court hearing in to United States v. Bernard, We find no reversible error declining permit to continue McLaughlin’s McLaughlin’s evaluation under The district court perceived McLaughlin’s behavior was a product of his defiance and adherence to Moorish Nationalist ideals, rather than any mental instability understand his revocation proceedings. discretion of the district court. United States v. James, 328 or inability to This was well within the Bernard, 708 F.3d at 592; see F.3d 953, 954 (7th Cir. 2003) (explaining that Moorish Nationals believe that they “need obey only those laws mentioned in an United States and Morocco”). 2 ancient treaty between the Accordingly, we affirm, the district court’s judgment. dispense with contentions are oral argument adequately because presented in the the facts We and legal materials before this 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.
