NO T REC OM M EN DE D F OR F UL L- TEX T P UB LIC AT ION F ile Nam e: 10a0114n.06 No. 08-4174 UN ITED STA TES C OU RT OF AP P EA LS F OR THE SI XT H C IR CU IT
UNI TED STATES OF AMERI CA, Plaintiff-Appellee , v. J ERMAI NE MCBEE, De fe nd ant- Ap pe lla

nt. )

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ON APPEALFROM THE U NI TED STATES DI STRICT COURT FOR THE N O R T H E R

N D IS T R IC T O F O H IO

B e fo re : G I B B ON S, SU TT ONand WHI TE , Ci rc uit

Judg e s.
SUT TO N, Cir c uit

Judg e . Jer

ma ine Mc B e e c ha lle ng e s h is 2 62 -m onth s e nte nc e —a nd mos t particula rly his status as a ca

ree r off ender . We affir

m.
McB ee pleaded guilty (1) to possession of cra ck coc aine with the intent to distribute it and (2) to beinga fe lon in possession of a fire arm. See 21 U. S.C. § 8 41 (a )( 1) , ( b) (1 )( A) ; 18 U. S.C. § 922(g )(1) . Over

McB ee’ s objection, the district court de termined that he had at lea st two prior felony convictions of “a

crime of violence,” makinghim a car eer offe nder. See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. After further adjustments, the court c alculate d an advisory guidelines rang e of 262–327 months. The court sente nced him to 262 months of incar cer ation and to 5 y ear s of supervise d rele ase.
McB ee c laims that his prior bur g la r y c o nv ic ti o n

u n der O hio law, seeO.R.C. § 2911.12(A)(4) , do e s n ot a mou nt t o a cr ime of vio le nc e . Ye t we re c e ntl y he ld o the rw ise inUnited States v. Sk ipper ,No. 08-4174

United States v. Mc

Bee

- 2 - 552 F.3d 489, 493 ( 6th Cir. 2009). Skipper , it is t rue, involved pla in-err or re view, id. at 491, but step one of the plain-er

ror inquiry

turns on whether

any err or occ urre d, and we found no er ror in tre ating § 2911.12(A)( 4) as a

crime of violence, id. at 493. The rea lity that McB ee pr eser

ved an obje ction in his case, while Skipper did not preser

ve one in his, thus does not help McB ee. Supplementing his counse l’s eff orts, McB ee filed a pro s e letter brie f desc ribingthe fa cts of his burg lary

conviction and attempting to show that his crime w as not a ty pical b u rglary . What matte r s , h o w e v e r , ar e n o t t h e f a c ts o f th e b ur g la

r y b u t t h e r e a li ty th at t h e y le d to a § 2 9 1 1 ( A )(4)
c o n v i c t i o n . In a

p p l yi n gth e c ar e e r

o f f e n d e r gu i d e l i n e s , w e t ak e a c at e g o r i c a l a p p r o a c h t o th e i n qu i r

y, focusingon the eleme nts of the statute of convic tion, not the underlying f acts of the defe ndant’s prior
case . S e e S h e p a rd v . U n ite d S ta tes , 5 4 4 U.S . 13, 17 (2005); United States v. Montane z , 442 F.3d 485, 489 (6th Cir. 2006).
Mc B e e do e s n ot d isp ute that hi s f e lon iou s a ssa

ult c onvic tio n c ounts a s a se c on d f e lony c ri me of v i o l e n c e . A l l t o l d , th e s e tw o c r i m e s o f v i o l e n c e p l u s th e i n s t an tc o n tr o l l e d

- s u b s t an c e o ff

e ns e make him a car eer

offe nder. See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. We thus need not dec ide whethe r two additional convictions amounted to crimes of violence
. Cf. United States v. Rone , 1 47 F . App ’x 49 0, 49 2 ( 6th Cir . 2 00 5) ; Un ite d S

tates v . H e rre ra , 375 F.3d 399, 406–07 ( 6th Cir. 2004).
McB ee separately challeng es t he subst antive reasonable ness of his s entenc e. B ut we have no authority

to addre ss this i ssue bec ause he waived the rig ht to appeal the r easona bleness of aNo. 08-4174

United States v. Mc

Bee

- 3 - within-g uidelines sentenc e in his plea ag ree ment. Se e Un ite d States v. D illar d , 438 F.3d 675, 685 (6th Cir. 2006).
For these re asons, we a ffirm.