US v. Patrick Crites, No. 13-4976 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4976 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. PATRICK CRITES, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. John Preston Bailey, Chief District Judge. (2:12-cr-00038-JPB-JSK-1) Submitted: April 7, 2014 Before KEENAN Circuit Judge. and WYNN, Decided: Circuit Judges, and April 15, 2014 DAVIS, Senior Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brian J. Kornbrath, Federal Public Defender, Clarksburg, West Virginia, for Appellant. William J. Ihlenfeld, II, United States Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Patrick Crites pleaded guilty to transmitting a threat to injure the person of another in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 875(a). interstate commerce, in The district court sentenced Crites to ten months imprisonment, and he now appeals. Finding no error, we affirm. On appeal, Crites argues that the district court erred in applying an enhancement under the Guidelines for an official victim. the In reviewing the district court s calculations under Guidelines, we review the district court s legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings for clear error. United States v. Manigan, 592 F.3d 621, 626 (4th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). We will find clear error only if, on the entire evidence, we are left with the definite committed. and firm conviction that a mistake has been Id. at 631 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The Guidelines provide that a district court shall apply a six-level increase in offense level when the victim of the offense is a government officer or employee, the offense was motivated by the victim s status as an officer or employee of the government, Chapter Two, Guidelines and Part Manual the A of base offense the ( USSG ) level Guidelines. § 3A1.2(a), 2 is derived U.S. (b) from Sentencing (2013). The commentary to that section provides that the [G]uideline applies when specified individuals are victims of the offense . . . [and] does not apply when the only organization, agency, or the government. n.1. victim is an USSG § 3A1.2 App. Because Crites threatened government employees rather than the government in general, we conclude that the district court did not err in applying the enhancement for an official victim under the Guidelines. See, e.g., United States v. Polk, 118 F.3d 286, 297-98 (5th Cir. 1997). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. legal We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this Court and argument would not aid in 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.
