US v. Maurice Melvin, No. 13-4857 (4th Cir. 2014)
Annotate this Case
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on October 26, 2015.
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 13-4857 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. MAURICE LASHAWN MELVIN, a/k/a Maurice Leshawn Melvin, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:12-cr-00323-F-1) Submitted: June 24, 2014 Decided: July 1, 2014 Before MOTZ, GREGORY, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Eric J. Brignac, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, 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 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.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: Maurice written plea Lashawn agreement, Melvin to pled guilty, possessing a pursuant firearm after to a being convicted of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924 (2012). He was sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act ( ACCA ) to 159 months in prison. * raises on The sole claim Melvin appeal is whether the sentencing that his prior North Carolina determining court erred convictions in for conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon constitute predicate offenses under the ACCA. We review de novo a district court s determination of whether prior offenses qualify as violent felonies for purposes of the ACCA. United States v. Hemingway, 734 F.3d 323, 331 (4th Cir. 2013). Melvin does not contest that the substantive North Carolina offense of robbery with a dangerous weapon is a violent felony under the ACCA. Rather, he contends that a conspiracy conviction cannot categorically operate as a predicate felony for ACCA purposes because conspiracy does not require an overt act. Circuit precedent forecloses challenging his sentence under the ACCA. * Melvin s argument See United States v. He received a downward departure below the mandatory statutory minimum pursuant to U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 5K1.1 (2012). 2 White, 571 F.3d 365, 371 (4th Cir. 2009) (holding North Carolina conviction for conspiracy to commit robbery with a dangerous weapon constitutes a predicate violent felony under ACCA). therefore reject Melvin s claim. See Scotts Co. v. We United Indus. Corp., 315 F.3d 264, 271 n.2 (4th Cir. 2002) (noting that a panel of this court cannot explicitly or implicitly overrule circuit precedent established by a prior panel; only the United States Supreme Court or this court sitting en banc may do so). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. legal We dispense with oral argument because the facts and contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid in 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.
