US v. D'Nez Autery, No. 09-4201 (4th Cir. 2009)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-4201 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. D NEZ DEVON AUTERY, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:08-cr-00167-JAB-1) Submitted: October 16, 2009 Decided: December 31, 2009 Before MICHAEL, MOTZ, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. J. Darren Byers, LAW OFFICES OF J. DARREN BYERS, P.A., WinstonSalem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Anna Mills Wagoner, United States Attorney, Lisa B. Boggs, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: D Nez Devon Autery pled guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement to possessing a firearm after being convicted of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). The court sentenced Autery to the statutory minimum sentence of 180 months imprisonment as a result of his armed career criminal status, and he timely appealed. Autery s attorney filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that there are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but questioning on Autery s behalf whether the district court erred in finding he was an armed career criminal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2006). Autery was given the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief, but declined. brief urging affirmance. Finding The Government filed a no reversible error, we affirm. Autery contends the district court erred when it found he had at least three previous convictions for violent offenses and was thus subject to enhanced penalties as an armed career criminal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). The evidence showed at least four predicate offenses, two convictions for breaking and entering, see United States v. Bowden, 975 F.2d 1080, 1082-85 (4th Cir. 1992), one conviction for attempted breaking and entering, see United States v. Custis, 988 F.2d 1355, 1364 (4th Cir. 1993), and one conviction for discharging a weapon into 2 occupied property. occurred on the The two breaking and entering convictions same day and all four convictions were consolidated at sentencing. In considering whether the district court properly designated Autery an armed career criminal, this court reviews the district court s legal determinations factual findings for clear error. 350 F.3d 446, 451 (4th Cir. de novo and its United States v. Wardrick, 2003). A person who violates § 922(g)(1), possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, and has three prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses committed on different occasions is an armed career criminal subject § 924(e)(1). to enhanced penalties. See 18 U.S.C. Occasions are those predicate offenses that can be isolated with a beginning and an end ones that constitute an occurrence unto themselves. 63 F.3d 332, 335 (4th Cir. United States v. Letterlough, 1995). Factors to look at are whether the convictions concern different geographical locations and different victims. Id. at 335-36. In Letterlough, two prior drug convictions occurred on separate occasions although the drug transactions were only two hours apart. was a complete and separate transaction. Each drug sale In United States v. James, 337 F.3d 387, 391 (4th Cir. 2003), the court found that two burglaries occurring at two different stores, across the street from each other, on the same day, occurred on separate 3 occasions. n.5 (4th In United States v. Hobbs, 136 F.3d 384, 387-89 & Cir. 1998), the court found that each of three burglaries occurring in the space of a single hour occurred on an occasion different from the others. Thus, convictions we and criminal. Even convictions find was properly if should Autery only have one had Id. at 389. at least designated of counted four an qualifying armed the breaking as a career and entering predicate § 924(e) conviction, there was no error because Autery still had three qualifying convictions. We find no error in the sentence as the district court was without discretion to impose a sentence lower than statutory minimum sentence of 180 months imprisonment. the United States v. Robinson, 404 F.3d 850, 862 (4th Cir. 2005). In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal. We therefore affirm Autery s conviction and sentence. This court requires counsel inform Autery, in writing, of the right to petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further review. If he requests that a petition be filed, but counsel believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel may move in representation. this court for leave to withdraw from Counsel s motion must state that a copy thereof was served on Autery. We dispense with oral argument because 4 the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 5
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
