Court Opinion

ID: 20458
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2010-04-25 07:34:42+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:58:38.266843
License: Public Domain

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

                         FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

                         _____________________

                              No. 99-10664
                            Summary Calendar
                         _____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

                                                 Plaintiff-Appellee,

                                versus

KEITH W. BLACK,
                                             Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________

      Appeal from the United States District Court for the
                    Northern District of Texas
                     USDC No. 3:98-CR-324-ALL
_________________________________________________________________
                           April 4, 2000

Before JOLLY, JONES, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

     Keith Black appeals his sentence after pleading guilty to the

fraudulent use of a social security number and to being a felon in

possession of a firearm.      Black argues that the district court

erred when it used the categorical approach set forth by this court

in United States v. Galvan-Rodriguez, 169 F.3d 217, 219 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied, 120 S. Ct. 100 (1999), to determine that his prior

conviction for the unlawful taking of a vehicle was a crime of

violence   for    sentence   enhancement   purposes   under   U.S.S.G.

§ 2K2.1(a)(2).

     *
      Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that
this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except
under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.
      This court need not reach the issue whether the court’s

approach was incorrect because, under the “residual clause” of

§   4B1.2(a)(2),   Black’s   underlying   conviction   was   a    crime   of

violence given that he stole the car at gunpoint.                See United

States v. Kirk, 111 F.3d 390, 394 (5th Cir. 1997).

                                                       A F F I R M E D.

                                   2