Court Opinion

ID: 9840709
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-19 21:00:52.358772+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:06:53.880316
License: Public Domain

USCA4 Appeal: 22-4308      Doc: 32         Filed: 09/18/2023     Pg: 1 of 2

                                             UNPUBLISHED

                               UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
                                   FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

                                               No. 22-4308

        UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                             Plaintiff - Appellee,

                      v.

        CARL RAY MCNEIL, JR.,

                             Defendant - Appellant.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at
        Wilmington. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (7:02-cr-00098-BO-1)

        Submitted: September 8, 2023                                Decided: September 18, 2023

        Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge.

        Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

        ON BRIEF: Raymond C. Tarlton, TARLTON LAW PLLC, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
        Appellant. Michael F. Easley, Jr., United States Attorney, David A. Bragdon, Lucy P.
        Brown, Assistant United States Attorneys, Kenneth A. Polite, Jr., Assistant Attorney
        General, Lisa H. Miller, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Thomas E. Booth, UNITED
        STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

        Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
USCA4 Appeal: 22-4308      Doc: 32         Filed: 09/18/2023     Pg: 2 of 2

        PER CURIAM:

              Carl Ray McNeil, Jr., pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, in

        violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g), and discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of

        violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). McNeil appeals the 365-month sentence

        imposed by the district court, arguing that the court’s factfinding in sentencing him as an

        armed career criminal violated the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. We affirm.

               We review de novo the district court’s legal determinations regarding the

        applicability of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). United

        States v. Thompson, 421 F.3d 278, 280-81 (4th Cir. 2005). Under the ACCA, a defendant

        is subject to a mandatory minimum 15-year term of imprisonment if he “has three previous

        convictions . . . for a violent felony or a serious drug offense, or both, committed on

        occasions different from one another.” 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). We recently rejected

        McNeil’s argument that the Fifth and Sixth Amendments require a jury to find that the

        three ACCA predicates were committed on different occasions, primarily relying on the

        Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998).

        See United States v. Brown, 67 F.4th 200, 201, 205-15 (4th Cir. 2023). While McNeil

        argues that Almendarez-Torrez should be overruled, we “remain bound by Almendarez-

        Torres.” Id. at 215.

               Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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

                                                    2