UNPUBLISHED

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: June 26, 2014 Decided: July 1, 2014

Before WILKINSON, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.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. 

Boggs, 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Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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 convicted 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-months 

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 Carolina 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. Simmons, 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 one 
3

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. This 

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, 

737 F.3d 33, 38-39 (4th Cir. 2013), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 

1773 (2014); see also North Carolina v. Bivens, 573 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 within 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 adequately presented in the materials before 

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED