US v. Sherman Turner, No. 09-5220 (4th Cir. 2010)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 09-5220 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SHERMAN ALAN TURNER, a/k/a Chuckie Allen Turner, a/k/a Sherman Turner, Turner, a/k/a Sherman Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:09-cr-00156-GBL-1) Submitted: October 20, 2010 Decided: November 17, 2010 Before NIEMEYER and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Michael S. Nachmanoff, Federal Public Defender, Frances H. Pratt, Aamra S. Ahmad, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellant. Neil H. MacBride, United States Attorney, Lanny A. Breuer, Assistant Attorney General, Greg D. Andres, Acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General, J. Campbell Barker, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Sherman Alan Turner pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2006). Based on his prior convictions for felony crimes of violence, Turner was sentenced pursuant to the Armed Career Criminal Act ( ACCA ), 18 imprisonment. U.S.C. § 924(e) (2006), to Turner appeals his sentence. 180 months of Finding no error, we affirm. Turner argues that his prior conviction for larceny from the person does not qualify as a violent felony under the ACCA. We have previously rejected a similar challenge, see United States v. Jarmon, 596 F.3d 228, 230-33 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 2010 WL 2215708 (2010) (No. 09-11134), and we disagree with Turner s argument that Jarmon has been called into question by the Supreme Court s decision in Johnson v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 1265 (2010). Therefore, we may not overrule this court s binding precedent. United States v. Simms, 441 F.3d 313, 318 (4th Cir. 2006) ( A decision of a panel of this court becomes the law of the circuit and is binding on other panels unless it is overruled by a subsequent en banc opinion of this court or a superseding contrary decision of the Supreme Court. (internal quotation omitted)). Therefore, this claim fails. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. oral argument because the facts 2 and legal We dispense with contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3
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.
