Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Numan Pompilio HERNANDEZ-SORTO, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2003-03-03
Citations: 56 F. App'x 609
Docket Number: No. 02-4335
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Numan Pompilio HERNANDEZ-SORTO, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 56
Pages: 609–610

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Numan Pompilio HERNANDEZ-SORTO, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 02-4335.
United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.
Submitted Feb. 11, 2003.
Decided March 3, 2003.
Matthew Wartel, Bynum & Jenkins, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Paul J. McNulty, United States Attorney, John Thomas Lynch, Jr., Special Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.
Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Numan Pompilio Hernandez-Soto pled guilty to one count of illegal re-entry after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a), (b)(2) (2000). He now appeals his sentence of twenty-two months, contending that the district court erred in finding that his prior state felony conviction for possession of cocaine qualified as an aggravated felony under the Sentencing Guidelines. Specifically, Hernandez-Soto contends that because his state felony conviction for simple possession of cocaine would only be punishable as a misdemean- or under federal law, it cannot qualify as an aggravated felony under the Guidelines. This contention is squarely foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Wilson, 316 F.3d 506 (4th Cir.2003).
Accordingly, we affirm Hernandez-Sor-to's sentence. 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.