Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mitchell GRICE, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-05-19
Citations: 63 F. App'x 146
Docket Number: No. 02-4894
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mitchell GRICE, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 63
Pages: 146–147

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mitchell GRICE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-4894.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted May 7, 2003.
Decided May 19, 2003.
Frank W. Dunham, Jr., Federal Public Defender, Geremy C. Kamens, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, Laura M. Ever-hart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Opinion:
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
OPINION
PER CURIAM.
Mitchell Grice appeals his conviction and sentence for possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B)(iii), being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). We affirm.
Grice's first claim is that the district court erred in admitting expert testimony and evidence concerning a fingerprint found on the magazine of the firearm recovered at the scene of the crime. Even assuming, without deciding, that the district court erred in admitting the fingerprint evidence, such error was rendered harmless when Grice testified that he had handled the magazine. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 52(a).
Grice also challenges the district court's calculation of his criminal history score. This court reviews a district court's factual findings at sentencing for clear error, and its legal application of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines de novo. United States v. Daughtrey, 874 F.2d 213, 217 (4th Cir.1989). We find the district court correctly calculated Grice's criminal history score.
Accordingly, we affirm Grice's conviction and sentence. 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.