UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-4258

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

GARRON MCMILLIAN,

 Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Wilmington. Malcolm J. Howard, Senior District Judge. (7:17-cr-00097-H-3)

Submitted: December 6, 2018 Decided: December 26, 2018

Before DUNCAN and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lynne L. Reid, LL REID LAW, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Robert J. 

Higdon, Jr., United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Phillip A. Rubin, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED 

STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Based on a February 10, 2017, incident, the United States indicted Garron 

McMillian and James Spencer Bell on one count of possessing a firearm after being 

convicted of a felony, and aiding and abetting one another, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 

and 922(g)(1).1 McMillian, who pled guilty without a plea agreement, now appeals his 

51-month sentence, arguing that the district court procedurally erred by finding that he 

possessed the firearm in connection with another felony offense and consequently 

applying the four-level enhancement set forth in U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B). We affirm.

The uncontested evidence presented below establishes that on February 10, 2017, 

local law enforcement officers in Lumberton, NC, were executing a narcotics search 

warrant at a residence, when they observed Bell and McMillian arrive at an adjacent 

residence in a truck driven by Bell. Recognizing the officers’ presence, Bell (with 

McMillian still in the truck) fled, driving at a high rate of speed and eventually off the 

road into an open field, where he attempted to flee on foot. The officers quickly 

apprehended Bell and found eight grams of marijuana and a digital scale on him. After 

ordering McMillian from the truck, officers found a stolen .45 caliber pistol inside. 

Officers also found another digital scale and a stolen .40 caliber pistol in the flight path of 

the truck, and they found 22 grams of crack cocaine in Bell’s flight path on foot.

 1 The United States also indicted Bell, who was described as a “notorious drug 

trafficker,” J.A. 57, on several other drug and firearm charges.
3

As noted, McMillian challenges the district court’s application of U.S.S.G. § 

2K2.1(b)(6)(B).2 The sentencing guidelines are only advisory, but “improper calculation 

of a guideline range constitutes significant procedural error, making the sentence 

procedurally unreasonable and subject to being vacated.” United States v. Hargrove, 701 

F.3d 156, 161 (4th Cir. 2012). To assess whether a district court properly calculated the 

guideline range, including its application of any sentencing enhancements, we review the 

court’s legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings for clear error. United States v. 

Fluker, 891 F.3d 541, 547 (4th Cir. 2018).

In pertinent part, § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) provides for a four-level enhancement to the 

base offense level if the defendant “used or possessed any firearm or ammunition in 

connection with another felony offense; or possessed or transferred any firearm or 

ammunition with knowledge, intent, or reason to believe that it would be used or 

possessed in connection with another felony offense.” “The purpose of this enhancement 

is to ensure that a defendant receives more severe punishment if, in addition to 

committing a firearms offense within the scope of § 2K2.1, he commits a separate felony 

offense that is rendered more dangerous by the presence of a firearm (or facilitates 

another person’s commission of an offense involving a firearm).” United States v. Blount, 

 2 The probation officer who prepared McMillian’s presentence report 

recommended that the district court apply the enhancement but noted that the advisory 

sentencing range would be 41-51 months without it. Over McMillian’s objection, the 

court applied the enhancement and calculated the advisory range to be 51-63 months. 

Although the court denied McMillian’s request for a downward variance, it did sentence 

him to the low end of the advisory range.
4

337 F.3d 404, 406 (4th Cir. 2003). We have explained that a defendant possesses a 

firearm “in connection with another felony offense” when the firearm facilitated, or had 

the potential of facilitating, the other offense, and this requirement is satisfied if the 

firearm had some purpose or effect with respect to the other offense, including if the 

firearm was present for protection or to embolden the actor. United States v. McKenzieGude, 671 F.3d 452, 463-64 (4th Cir. 2011). The commentary to § 2K2.1 specifically 

provides that a defendant possesses a firearm in connection with another felony “in the 

case of a drug trafficking offense in which a firearm is found in close proximity to drugs, 

drug-manufacturing materials, or drug paraphernalia . . . because the presence of the 

firearm has the potential of facilitating [that drug-trafficking] felony offense.” U.S.S.G. § 

2K2.1 cmt. n. 14(B).

In making his objection to the § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement during the 

sentencing hearing, McMillian argued that he had no ownership interest in the truck, 

none of the drug contraband was found where he was a passenger, and there was no 

evidence that he knew Bell possessed any drugs. Although the district court asked 

McMillian’s counsel why McMillian was in the truck with Bell, counsel could not offer a 

concrete answer; instead counsel simply described McMillian’s relationship with Bell as 

a “boneheaded move.” J.A. 55. After hearing argument from the government, the court 

overruled the objection, finding that McMillian’s possession of a stolen firearm in the 

vehicle with Bell, “who was found with marijuana, cocaine, digital scales, [and] another 

firearm, is evidence that [McMillian] had reason to believe the firearm of the incident 
5

offense would be used in connection with another felony offense as needed; to wit, a drug 

trafficking crime.” J.A. 58.

On appeal, McMillian acknowledges that the record supports a finding that Bell 

was engaged in drug trafficking during the February 10, 2017, incident, but he reiterates 

his argument that there is insufficient evidence to connect him to Bell’s activity. Having 

carefully reviewed the record in light of the controlling legal principles, we are satisfied 

that the district court did not clearly err in finding that McMillian possessed the firearm 

in connection with Bell’s drug trafficking activity. It therefore follows that the court 

appropriately applied the § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) enhancement.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm McMillian’s sentence. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED