United States v. White, 091321 FED4, 20-4490

Docket Nº20-4490
Opinion JudgePER CURIAM.
Party NameUNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ADRIAN JEROME WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.
AttorneyBrian M. Aus, BRIAN AUS, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant. Matthew G.T. Martin, United States Attorney, Ashley E. Waid, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Judge PanelBefore MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Case DateSeptember 13, 2021
CourtUnited States Courts of Appeals, United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

ADRIAN JEROME WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 20-4490

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

September 13, 2021

UNPUBLISHED

Submitted: September 9, 2021

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr., Senior District Judge. (1:19-cr-00571-NCT-1)

Brian M. Aus, BRIAN AUS, ATTORNEY AT LAW, Durham, North Carolina, for Appellant.

Matthew G.T. Martin, United States Attorney, Ashley E. Waid, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before MOTZ, KING, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM.

Adrian Jerome White appeals from his conviction after a jury trial for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2). On appeal, White challenges the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss the felon-in-possession charge, arguing for the first time that the indictment was defective because it charged White with having knowledge of his felony conviction instead of charging that "he knew he belonged to the relevant category of persons barred from possessing a firearm," based on Rehaif v. United States, 139 S.Ct. 2191, 2200 (2019). White further argues for the first time on appeal that the district court erred by failing to properly instruct the jury on the knowledge of status element because it repeated the indictment error and overstated the category of persons barred from possessing firearms. We affirm.

White raises his arguments for the first time on appeal, so we review for plain error. Greer v. United States, 141 S.Ct. 2090, 2096 (2021). "To succeed in obtaining plain-error relief, a defendant must show (1) an error, (2) that is plain, (3) and that affects substantial rights, which generally means that there must be a reasonable probability that, but for the error, the outcome of the proceeding would have been different." United States v. Caldwell, __F.4th__, __, No. 19-4019, 2021 WL 3356951, at *11 (4th Cir. Aug. 3, 2021) (internal quotation marks omitted). If those three threshold requirements are met, "we may grant relief if we conclude that the error had a serious effect on the fairness, integrity or public...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT