US v. Bernard Reese, No. 13-4430 (4th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4430 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. BERNARD EVERETT REESE, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, District Judge. (1:12-cr-00337-TDS-1) Submitted: December 19, 2013 Decided: December 23, 2013 Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, John A. Dusenbury, Jr., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Michael A. DeFranco, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Bernard Everett Reese pleaded guilty, pursuant to a conditional plea agreement, to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Counsel has filed an Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967) brief, stating that there are no meritorious issues for appeal, but that Reese wished to challenge the denial of his motion to suppress apartment. the shotgun found during a search of his Reese filed a pro se supplemental brief reiterating arguments brief. a by counsel. The Government declined to file a We affirm. In considering the denial of a suppression motion, we review the district court s legal determinations de novo and its factual findings for clear error. United States v. Kelly, 592 F.3d 586, 589 (4th Cir. 2010). The court view[s] the facts in the the light most favorable to Government, as the party prevailing below. United States v. Black, 707 F.3d 531, 534 (4th The Cir. 2013). court also defer[s] to the district court s credibility findings, as it is the role of the [trial] court to observe witnesses and weigh their credibility during a pre-trial motion to suppress. United States v. Griffin, 589 F.3d 148, 150-51 n.1 (4th Cir. 2009) (internal quotation marks omitted). We have reviewed the transcript of the motion to suppress hearing and the district court s detailed ruling on the 2 motion and find no clear error in the district court s finding of facts or error in its legal conclusions. credibility findings. Accordingly, there We defer to its is no reason to reverse the ruling. In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Reese s conviction and sentence. This court requires that counsel inform Reese, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If Reese requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in representation. this and materials legal before for leave to withdraw from Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Reese. facts court We dispense with oral argument because the contentions are adequately this and argument court presented would not in the aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3