**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 4265** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. DEQUANTEY MAURICE WILLIAMS , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro
. Catherine C. Eagles , District Judge. ( 1:12

- cr - 00110

- CCE

- 1 )

Submitted : Ju ne 26 , 2014 Decided: July 1, 2014

Before WILKINSON, KING , and GREGORY , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, John A. Dusenbury, Jr., Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Lisa B. B oggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Dequantey Maurice Williams pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a person previously con victed of a felony offense. 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(e) (2012). The district court determined that Williams qualified as an armed career criminal subject to a 180

- month minimum sentence. The court departed downward and sentenced Williams to 153

- month s imprisonment. He appeals, challenging the determination that he qualified as an armed career criminal, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). We affirm. Section 924(e) provides for a 180

- month minimum sentence upon violation of § 922(g) by a person who has three or

more prior felony convictions for either violent felonies or serious drug trafficking offenses. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). Williams concedes that he had two qualifying predicate offenses. At issue in this appeal is whether Williams’ 2005 conviction of North Caro lina common law robbery is a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment exceeding one year, thus qualifying as a felony offense and the third predicate conviction required for Williams to be sentenced as an armed career criminal.
In United States v. Simmon s , 649 F.3d 237 (4th Cir. 2011), we held that a North Carolina conviction is a crime punishable by more than one year of imprisonment if the particular defendant is eligible for a sentence of more than one3 year, taking into account his criminal history and the nature of his offense. Id. at 247 & n.9. Williams contends that the common law robbery offense does not qualify because he was sentenced within the mitigated range under North Carolina’s Structured Sentencing Act, to 8 to 10 months imprisonment. Th is court has held that, although a defendant is sentenced within the mitigated range, the maximum sentence the defendant could receive is determined by the presumptive range under the North Carolina Structured Sentencing Act . See United States v. Kerr , 73 7 F.3d 33 , 38

- 39 (4th Cir. 2013), cert. denied , 134 S. Ct. 1773 (2014); see also North Carolina v. Bivens , 5 73 S.E.2d 259, 261

– 62 ( N.C. App. 2002) (providing that, even if judge finds that mitigating factors outweigh aggravating factors, the judge may sentence the defendant with in the presumptive range )
. Because the maximum sentence in the presumptive range for Williams’ common law robbery offense exceeded 12 months, this conviction qualified as a felony offense , and thus his armed career criminal enhancement was proper. Accordingly, we affirm Williams’ sentence
. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequatel y presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRME D