United States of America v. Rondall Dion Upshaw, a/k/a Ronald Dion Upshaw, a/k/a Christopher Lee Johnson

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-5070
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
RONDALL DION UPSHAW, a/k/a Ronald Dion Upshaw, a/k/a
Christopher Lee Johnson,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (4:11-cr-00052-BO-1)
Submitted: June 12, 2012 Decided: June 21, 2012
Before AGEE, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer
P. May-Parker, Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

-- 1 of 3 --

2
PER CURIAM:
Rondall Dion Upshaw pled guilty without a plea
agreement to possession of ammunition by a convicted felon, 18
U.S.C. § 922(g) (2006). He was sentenced to 120 months in
prison. Upshaw now appeals, claiming that the district court
erred when it applied the murder cross reference, see U.S.
Sentencing Guidelines Manual §§ 2K2.1(c)(1)(A), 2X1.1, 2A2.1
(2010), to calculate his Guidelines range. We affirm.
At sentencing, a detective testified that Upshaw was
one of three men hired in Atlanta to travel to North Carolina to
kill two persons involved in the drug trade. Upshaw and the
others were supplied with guns and money to accomplish their
mission. They met the victims under the pretext of conducting a
drug transaction. Shooting began at the location of that sham
transaction. The victims fled in their car, with Upshaw and his
accomplices chasing them in another vehicle. During the chase,
shots were fired into the victims’ car. When apprehended
shortly after his vehicle crashed, Upshaw was in possession of
two loaded 9 mm. magazines.
In light of this testimony, we hold that the district
court did not clearly err in applying the murder cross
reference. A preponderance of the evidence establishes that
Upshaw was hired to commit murder, and he possessed the
ammunition in an attempt to carry out the murder. See 18 U.S.C.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
§ 1111 (2006) (defining first degree murder); USSG § 2A2.1(a)(1)
(stating that base offense level 33 applies if “object of
offense would have constituted first degree murder” if
successful).
We accordingly affirm. We dispense with oral argument
because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the material before the court and argument would not aid the
decisional process.
AFFIRMED

-- 3 of 3 --