Case Name: UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Larry Joseph HOLT Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-04-17
Citations: 682 F. App'x 543
Docket Number: No. 16-3179
Parties: UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Larry Joseph HOLT Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before SMITH, Chief Judge, ARNOLD and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 682
Pages: 543–544

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America Plaintiff-Appellee v. Larry Joseph HOLT Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-3179
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: April 3, 2017
Filed: April 17, 2017
Stephen R. Casey, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Sirena Miller Wissler, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S, Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Missouri, Saint Louis, MO, for Plaintiff-Appellee
Larry Joseph Holt, Pro Se
Nanci McCarthy, Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Saint Louis, MO, for Defendant-Appellant
Before SMITH, Chief Judge, ARNOLD and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
After Larry Holt pleaded guilty to two counts of being a felon in possession of a firearm, see 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and one count of conspiring to distribute heroin, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C), and 18 U.S.C. § 2, the district court sentenced him as an armed career criminal. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). He maintains on appeal that the district court erred in concluding that he is an armed career criminal because his conviction for unlawfully using a weapon under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 571.030.1(4) is not a "violent felony" under the Armed Career Criminal Act. Holt recognizes that our court has already determined that a conviction under this statute is a violent felony, see United States v. Pulliam, 566 F.3d 784, 788 (8th Cir. 2009), but he argues that we are not bound by Pulliam in light of intervening Supreme Court decisions. We reject Holt's argument because another panel of our court recently determined that Pulliam is still good law despite the same authorities that Holt relies on here. See United States v. Hudson, 851 F.3d 807, 809-10 (8th Cir. 2017). The decision of a prior panel binds our panel. United States v. Eason, 829 F.3d 633, 641 (8th Cir. 2016).
Affirmed.
. The Honorable Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri.