United States v. Hunter , 238 F. App'x 938 ( 2007 )

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-5018
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
DANA LEE HUNTER,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (1:06-cr-00105-JAB)
Submitted: May 23, 2007 Decided: July 10, 2007
Before NIEMEYER, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Louis C. Allen, III, Federal Public Defender, William C.
Ingram, Jr., First Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro,
North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States
Attorney, Kearns Davis, Assistant United States Attorney,
Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dana Lee Hunter entered a conditional plea of guilty to
one count of possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of 18
U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2) (2000), reserving the right to
challenge the district court’s denial of his motion to dismiss the
indictment. Hunter appeals, contending that his predicate state
conviction, cruelty to animals, did not satisfy § 922(g)(1) as a
matter of law. Finding no error, we affirm.
Section 922(g)(1) prohibits anyone who has been convicted
of a crime punishable by more than a year in prison to possess a
firearm. 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Hunter asserts that, under North
Carolina’s structured sentencing scheme law, his maximum sentence
was less than twelve months because no aggravating factors were
either admitted or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
However, as Hunter concedes, his argument is foreclosed by United
States v. Harp, 406 F.3d 242, 246-47 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 126
S. Ct. 297 (2005). Thus, because it is undisputed that a sentence
of over twelve months could be imposed on a defendant convicted of
cruelty to animals in North Carolina, Hunter’s prior conviction was
properly considered a predicate felony under § 922(g)(1).
Accordingly, we affirm Hunter’s conviction. We dispense
with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are
- 2 -
adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument
would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -