United States v. McDaniels ( 1997 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. No. 97-4051
PHILLIP BARRY MCDANIELS,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge.
(CR-96-166-BO)
Submitted: July 24, 1997
Decided: August 11, 1997
Before HAMILTON, LUTTIG, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.
_________________________________________________________________
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
_________________________________________________________________
COUNSEL
William Arthur Webb, Federal Public Defender, Gordon Widenhouse,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Janice McKenzie Cole, United States Attorney, Anne M.
Hayes, Assistant United States Attorney, Peter W. Kellen, Assistant
United States Attorney, Amy Melissa Guy, Third Year Law Student,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See
Local Rule 36(c).
_________________________________________________________________
OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Phillip Barry McDaniels pled guilty to escape from custody in vio-
lation of 18 U.S.C. § 751(a) (1994), and received a sentence of 37
months imprisonment consecutive to the 50-month sentence he was
then serving in a minimum security facility. McDaniels contends on
appeal that the district court erred in finding that the escape was a
crime of violence and sentencing him as a career offender. United
States Sentencing Commission, Guidelines Manual , § 4B1.1 (Nov.
1996). We affirm.
McDaniels walked away from his work detail at a golf course at
the Federal Correctional Institution at Seymour Johnson Air Force
Base in North Carolina. He hitchhiked to South Carolina where he
was arrested without incident two days later. He argues that the
escape was not a crime of violence. McDaniels acknowledges our
holding in United States v. Dickerson, 77 F.3d 774, 777 (4th Cir.),
cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 65 U.S.L.W. 3259 (U.S. Oct. 7, 1996)
(No. 95-9207), that "the crime of felony attempted escape from cus-
tody, in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 751(a), in the abstract, involves
conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to
another, and thus, constitutes a crime of violence for purposes of the
Career Offender provision of the Sentencing Guidelines, see USSG
§ 4B1.1." Our decision in Dickerson encompasses any escape or
attempted escape, including escape from a minimum security facility.
Williams contends that Dickerson was wrongly decided; however, as
he recognizes, a panel cannot overrule the decision of a prior panel
in this circuit. See Brubaker v. City of Richmond, 943 F.2d 1363,
1381-82 (4th Cir. 1991).
The sentence is therefore affirmed. We dispense with oral argu-
ment because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented
in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the deci-
sional process.
AFFIRMED
2