Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David C. WHITE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2011-07-05
Citations: 437 F. App'x 223
Docket Number: No. 10-5168
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David C. WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 437
Pages: 223–224

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David C. WHITE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 10-5168.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: June 30, 2011.
Decided: July 5, 2011.
Mary Lou Newberger, Federal Public Defender, Lex A. Coleman, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Jonathan D. Byrne, Appellate Counsel, Charleston, WV, for Appellant. R. Booth Goodwin, II, United States Attorney, William B. King, II, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, WV, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David C. White appeals the district court's revocation of his term of supervised release. On appeal, White argues that the district court clearly erred in finding that he jointly possessed ammunition found inside his home, and abused its discretion in revoking his term of supervised release. We affirm.
We review the district court's decision to revoke a defendant's supervised release for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Copley, 978 F.2d 829, 831 (4th Cir.1992). The district court need only find a violation of a condition of supervised release by a preponderance of the evidence. 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e)(3) (2006). We review factual determinations informing the conclusion that a violation occurred for clear error. United States v. Carothers, 337 F.3d 1017, 1019 (8th Cir.2003).
Our review of the record leads us to conclude that the district court neither clearly erred in finding that White jointly possessed the ammunition found inside his home, nor abused its discretion in revoking White's supervised release. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's judgment. 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.
AFFIRMED.