Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
No. 11-4389
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:10-cr-00289-TDS-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
PER CURIAM:
Pursuant
to
written
plea
agreement,
Anthony
Vonn
exceeding
one
year,
in
violation
of
18
U.S.C.
2011).
Particularly,
Harris
complains
that
the
record
the
North
Carolina
Fair
Sentencing
Act,
which
was
in
one
year
of
imprisonment,
2
independent
of
any
findings
criminal
designation
for
any
potential
Simmons
error.
se
supplemental
brief.
For
the
following
reasons,
we
affirm.
I.
We first conclude that Harris conviction is valid.
Section 922(g)(1) prohibits the possession of a firearm by any
person
who
has
been
convicted
in
any
court
of,
crime
18
deadly
weapon
on
government
official *
pre-date
S.E.2d 280, 288 (N.C. Ct. App. 2011) (explaining that the Fair
Sentencing
succeeded
Act
by
was
the
repealed
Structured
15A1340.10 to 1340.33).
effective
Sentencing
October
Act,
N.C.
1994
Gen.
and
Stat.
felony
was
three
years
in
prison.
See
State
v.
Lawrence, 667 S.E.2d 262, 264 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008) (Under the
Fair
Sentencing
Act,
ten
Class
felony
with
presumptive
years,
carried
term
maximum
punishment
of
of
three
years.).
P.
complied
we
have
11
with
guilty plea.
reviewed
hearing
the
and
mandates
the
transcript
conclude
of
Rule
that
11
of
Harris
the
in
district
accepting
Fed.
R.
court
Harris
II.
We next review the propriety of Harris armed career
criminal
designation.
Because
Harris
did
not
challenge
his
131
S.
Ct.
2943
(2011).
To
prevail
under
this
Id. at 190.
Only if the
the
error
be
viewed
as
affecting
the
defendants
substantial rights.
Thus, the
Id.
discretion
fairness,
only
integrity
proceedings.
if
the
or
error
public
seriously
reputation
affects
of
the
judicial
18
U.S.C.
924(e),
if
defendant
violates
or
minimum
term
serious
of
drug
offenses,
imprisonment
is
5
the
fifteen
statutory
years.
mandatory
18
U.S.C.
924(e)(1).
18 U.S.C. 924(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii).
We have thoroughly reviewed the record and conclude
qualifies
as
burglary);
see
also
United
States
v.
Thompson, 421 F.3d 278, 284 (4th Cir. 2005) (explaining that
Bowden addressed why violations of the North Carolina [breaking
or
entering]
statute
are
violent
felonies
for
ACCA
to
qualify
prior
conviction
as
felony.
We thus
Court
of
the
United
States
for
further
review.
If
this
court
for
leave
to
withdraw
from
representation.
contentions
the
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
AFFIRMED