Case ID: f-appx_316/html/0290-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jermol CHIN, Defendant—Appellant.
    No. 07-5146.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
    Submitted: Feb. 12, 2009.
    Decided: March 9, 2009.
    James Wyda, Federal Public Defender, Paresh S. Patel, Staff Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosen-stein, United States Attorney, Debra L. Dwyer, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
    Before TRAXLER, GREGORY, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.
   Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jermol Chin pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). The district court determined he had three prior convictions of serious drug offenses for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), and therefore sentenced Chin to the statutory mandatory minimum sentence of 180 months’ imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2006). Chin has appealed and contends that due to Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), and United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), the district court erred in sentencing him under the ACCA based on predicate convictions that were neither admitted by him nor proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Chin acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by precedent, but wishes to preserve the issue for further review. See Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998); United, States v. Cheek, 415 F.3d 349 (4th Cir.2005). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. 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.