Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Marcus Antonio MCSWAIN, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2007-10-31
Citations: 252 F. App'x 574
Docket Number: No. 07-4081
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Marcus Antonio MCSWAIN, Defendant—Appellant.
Judges: Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 252
Pages: 574–574

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Marcus Antonio MCSWAIN, Defendant—Appellant.
No. 07-4081.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted: Oct. 17, 2007.
Decided: Oct. 31, 2007.
Thomas N. Cochran, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Michael F. Joseph, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Marcus A. McSwain pled guilty to one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (2000), pursuant to North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970). On appeal, he challenges the district court's imposition of the statutory maximum sentence of 120 months' imprisonment.
We find that the district court properly applied the Sentencing Guidelines and considered the relevant sentencing factors before imposing the 120-month sentence. 18 U.S.C.A. § 3553(a) (West 2000 & Supp. 2007). Additionally, we find that the sentence imposed was reasonable. See United States v. Johnson, 445 F.3d 339, 341 (4th Cir.2006); Rita v. United States, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2462-69, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007) (upholding presumption of reasonableness accorded within-guidelines sentence). Accordingly, we affirm McSwain's 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.