US v. Bronson Gainey, No. 11-4467 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-4467 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. BRONSON JERMAINE GAINEY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:10-cr-00336-WO-1) Submitted: December 15, 2011 Decided: December 19, 2011 Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Ames C. Chamberlin, LAW OFFICES OF AMES C. CHAMBERLIN, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Paul A. Weinman, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Bronson Jermaine Gainey pled guilty to possession of a stolen firearm and was sentenced to 120 months in prison. On appeal, at he challenges sentencing to apply the a district two-level court s enhancement decision for recklessly creating a substantial risk of serious bodily injury or death while being pursued by police pursuant Guidelines Manual § 3C1.2 (2010). This court reviews to U.S. Sentencing Finding no error, we affirm. the district court s factual findings regarding a sentencing enhancement for clear error and the legal States interpretations v. Carter, 601 of F.3d the 252, Guidelines 254 (4th de novo. Cir. United 2010). An individual s acts are considered reckless when he was aware of the risk created by his conduct and the risk was of such a nature gross and degree deviation that from to the disregard standard of that care person would exercise in such a situation. risk that constituted a a reasonable USSG §§ 2A1.4 cmt. n.1, 3C1.2 cmt. n.2. Here, after an officer attempted to detain Gainey while investigating a shots fired call, Gainey instructed the driver of a car to go, go, go, while the officer was at least partly in the car. In addition, there was a firearm near Gainey and a pit bull and three other individuals in the car, as well as at least one other suspect on the street approaching the 2 car. We conclude that Gainey s conduct during the pursuit was sufficient to support the two-level increase. Accordingly, we affirm Gainey s sentence. 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.
