UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 95-5985

ELIZABETH RUTH SHEEHAN,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro.

William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge.

(CR-95-236)

Argued: March 7, 1997

Decided: April 21, 1997

Before HAMILTON, Circuit Judge, KISER,

Chief United States District Judge for the

Western District of Virginia, sitting by designation,

and GOODWIN, United States District Judge for the

Southern District of West Virginia, sitting by designation.

_________________________________________________________________

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

ARGUED: Thomas Norman Cochran, Assistant Federal Public

Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Harry L. Hobgood, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina,

for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Elizabeth Ruth Sheehan was arrested at the Atlanta International

Airport on August 28, l995 after a consensual search of her luggage

turned up over 1,200 grams of crack cocaine. Ms. Sheehan's cooperation with the government led to the conviction of her codefendant.

Ms. Sheehan entered a plea of guilty and, after a government motion

for a downward departure, was sentenced to a fifty-four month term

of imprisonment.

At her initial appearance, the court found that Ms. Sheehan was

indigent and released her on personal recognizance provided that she

promised "to appear at all proceedings as required and to surrender

for service of any sentence imposed." Order Setting Conditions of

Release, ¶ 4. The court further ordered that the defendant be placed

in the custody of her parents, who reside in Socco, Maine. The defendant promised to obey all conditions of release and returned to Maine

to reside with her parents.

She later traveled to North Carolina on three occasions to appear

in court -- for her arraignment on October 2, 1995; to change her plea

on November 7, l995; and for her sentencing on January 25, l996. Ms.

Sheehan moved the court to direct the United States Marshal, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4285 and 28 U.S.C. § 1651, to provide her with

noncustodial transportation or to pay for round trip travel incident to

all three of her Court appearances and for subsistence en route. The

district court ordered payment of expenses for one-way travel and

related subsistence for the trip to court for the January 25, l996 sentencing hearing, but otherwise denied the defendant's motion. She

filed a timely appeal.

The defendant's counsel properly conceded at oral argument that

the standard of review under either statute is for an abuse of discre-

 2
tion. See Kemp v. Peterson, 940 F.2d 110 (10th Cir. 1995) (reviewing

district court order under 18 U.S.C. § 4285 for an abuse of discretion); United States v. Kennedy, 64 F.3d 1465 (4th Cir. 1993) (applying abuse of discretion standard to 28 U.S.C. § 1651). After reviewing

the parties' briefs, the record, and the oral arguments of counsel, we

find that it is unnecessary to address whether 18 U.S.C. § 4285 or 28

U.S.C. § 1651 gives district courts the authority to order the United

States Marshal to reimburse defendants for such expenses. The district court's refusal to pay travel expenses would not have constituted

an abuse of discretion under either 18 U.S.C. § 4285 or 28 U.S.C.

§ 1651. Accordingly, we affirm.

AFFIRMED

 3