United States v. Marcus Chatman

610 F. App'x 942
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedJuly 24, 2015
Docket14-11300
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 610 F. App'x 942 (United States v. Marcus Chatman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Marcus Chatman, 610 F. App'x 942 (11th Cir. 2015).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Marcus Chatman appeals his 180-month prison sentence, imposed after a jury convicted him of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e). Chatman argues the district court erred by sentencing him under the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) and U.S.S.G. § 4B 1.4(a), based on his prior convictions for possession with intent to sell cocaine, in violation of Florida Statutes § 893.13(1). Chatman contends his prior § 893.13 convictions do not qualify as ACCA-predicate “serious drug offense[s]” under § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii) because they lack a mem rea requirement. 1 Chatman’s sole argument on appeal is foreclosed by United States v. Smith, 775 F.3d 1262, 1264, 1267-68 (11th Cir.2014), which held convictions for possession with intent to sell a controlled substance, in violation of § 893.13(1), qualify as “serious drug offense[s]” under § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii). We therefore affirm.

AFFIRMED.

1

. We review de novo whether a prior conviction qualifies as an ACCA "serious drug offense.” United States v. Robinson, 583 F.3d 1292, 1294 (11th Cir.2009).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
610 F. App'x 942, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-marcus-chatman-ca11-2015.