United States v. Swindell

F I L E D
United States Court of Appeals
Tenth Circuit
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
AUG 26 2004
TENTH CIRCUIT
PATRICK FISHER
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee, No. 03-7110
v. (D.C. No. 03-CR-37-P)
RODNEY HADEN SWINDELL, (E. D. Oklahoma)
Defendant - Appellant.
ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BRISCOE , McKAY , and HARTZ , Circuit Judges.
Defendant Rodney Swindell pleaded guilty on May 22, 2003, to felon in
possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court
sentenced Defendant to 15 years’ imprisonment under the Armed Career Criminal
Act (ACCA), which subjects a person “who violates [18 U.S.C.] section
922(g) . . . and has three previous convictions . . . for a violent felony or a serious
drug offense” to a minimum of 15 years’ imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1).
Defendant appeals, arguing that the district court erred in counting one of three
*
This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the
doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court
generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order
and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.
prior convictions as a “serious drug offense” within the meaning of the ACCA,
and thereby in enhancing his sentence under the Act. We have jurisdiction over
the appeal under 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a).
Defendant’s presentence report listed prior convictions for conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute marijuana, possession with intent to distribute
methamphetamine, and unlawful delivery of a controlled drug. The district court
treated these three offenses as “serious drug offense[s]” within the meaning of the
ACCA.
One of the convictions, however, did not so qualify. Under the ACCA a
drug conviction must be punishable by 10 years or more in prison to qualify as a
“serious drug offense,” 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(A); and Defendant’s 1976 federal
conviction for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana was
punishable by a maximum of five years in prison at the time. In its answer brief
the government concedes that Defendant’s prior conviction for conspiracy to
possess with intent to distribute marijuana was not a “serious drug offense,” and
that the sentence is therefore incorrect.
We VACATE Defendant’s sentence and REMAND for resentencing.
ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Harris L Hartz
Circuit Judge
-2-