# United States v. Leonard Christopher Brown

> Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · December 23, 2011 · 459 F. App'x 253

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/619769

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Leonard Christopher BROWN, Defendant-Appellant
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
- **Decided:** December 23, 2011
- **Citations:** 459 F. App'x 253
- **Precedential status:** Unpublished
- **Opinion:** Opinion
- **Judges:** Wilkinson, King, Agee
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/619769

## Opinion text

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-4469

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

LEONARD CHRISTOPHER BROWN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, Chief District
Judge. (2:08-cr-00424-DCN-1)

Submitted: November 28, 2011 Decided: December 23, 2011

Before WILKINSON, KING, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeremy A. Thompson, LAW OFFICE OF JEREMY A. THOMPSON, LLC,
Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellant. William N. Nettles,
United States Attorney, Sean Kittrell, Assistant United States
Attorney, Charleston, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:

Leonard Christopher Brown entered a plea, pursuant to

North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (1970), to possession of a

firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18

U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), 924(e) (2006). He received a

sentence of seventy-two months’ imprisonment. Brown appeals his

sentence, contending that the district court abused its

discretion when it denied his request for a downward departure

under U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5K2.13 (2010) based on

his diminished capacity. For the reasons explained below, we

dismiss the appeal.

The district court has the discretion to depart

downward if “(1) the defendant committed the offense while

suffering from a significantly reduced mental capacity; and (2)

the significantly reduced mental capacity contributed

substantially to the commission of the offense.” USSG § 5K2.13.

However, “[w]e lack the authority to review a sentencing court’s

denial of a downward departure unless the court failed to

understand its authority to do so.” United States v. Brewer,

520 F.3d 367, 371 (4th Cir. 2008). Our review of the record

discloses that the district court did not fail to recognize its

authority to depart. Thus, Brown’s claim is not reviewable on

appeal.

2
We therefore dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED

3

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/619769. Public record. Not legal advice.