United States v. Mark Belidor
This text of 279 F. App'x 924 (United States v. Mark Belidor) 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.
Opinion
Appellant Mark Belidor (“Belidor”) appeals his sentence of 226 months imprisonment for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e). On appeal, Belidor argues that the district court erred by sentencing him as an armed career criminal under § 924(e) because: (a) his prior convictions for resisting arrest with violence did not meet the statutory definition of “crimes of violence,” as required by the statute, and (b) the government did not *925 plead and prove to a jury the specific circumstances of his prior convictions.
We are precluded from reviewing an alleged defect, even for plain error, when a party has invited the error. United States v. Harris, 443 F.3d 822, 823-24 (11th Cir.2006). “The doctrine of invited error is implicated when a party induces or invites the district court into making an error.” Id.
Because Belidor stated at his sentencing hearing that he agreed with his classification as an armed career criminal, he invited the error of which he now complains, and, thus, we are precluded from reviewing the alleged error. Therefore, we conclude Belidor is entitled to no relief and we affirm his sentence.
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
279 F. App'x 924, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mark-belidor-ca11-2008.