US v. Harold Ford, No. 10-4176 (4th Cir. 2011)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-4176 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff Appellee, v. HAROLD FORD, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (7:08-cr-00093-BR-1) Submitted: September 15, 2011 Decided: September 27, 2011 Before WILKINSON, WYNN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Reversed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, G. Alan DuBois, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B. Holding, United States Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Harold Ford was convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), 924 (2006). The district court months imprisonment. conviction was sentenced Ford to seventy-eight Ford appealed, arguing that his prior not punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year and, thus, could not serve as a predicate conviction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Ford has moved to vacate his conviction and remand the case to the district court. In light of United States v. Simmons, ___ F.3d ___, No. 08 4475, 2011 WL 3607266 (4th Cir. Aug. 17, 2011) (en banc), we reverse. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), it is unlawful for any person convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year to possess a firearm. North Carolina state conviction was not imprisonment for a term exceeding one year. § 15A-1340.17(c)-(d) (2009) sentences applicable sentencing scheme). district States court, v. Subsequently, it Harp, (setting under When was 406 however, out North raised foreclosed by we 242, overruled punishable minimum this our by See N.C. Gen. Stat. and Carolina s Ford F.3d Ford s prior maximum structured argument decision in in 246 (4th Cir. Harp with our the United 2005). en banc decision in Simmons, in which we sustained a similar argument in favor of the defendant. In view of our holding in Simmons, we 2 reverse Ford s conviction, deny as moot the motion to vacate, and remand the case to the district court for further proceedings. We direct the clerk to issue the mandate forthwith. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. REVERSED AND REMANDED 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.
