UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 05-4351
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
RICHARD STEVEN KEEN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (CR-04-204)
Submitted: December 22, 2005 Decided: December 28, 2005
Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Frank D. Whitney, United States Attorney, Anne M.
Hayes, Christine Witcover Dean, Assistant United States Attorneys,
Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
See Local Rule 36(c).
PER CURIAM:
Richard Steven Keen pled guilty to possession of a
firearm by a convicted felon and possession of stolen firearms, 18
U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), (j) (2000). He was sentenced as an armed
career criminal to the statutory minimum sentence of fifteen years
imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2000). Keen appeals his
sentence, arguing that the district court’s determination that he
was an armed career criminal violated his Fifth Amendment right to
have facts that increase the maximum sentence alleged in the
indictment, and violated his Sixth Amendment right to have such
facts submitted to a jury. We affirm.
Keen preserved the issue he raises on appeal by objecting
to his armed career criminal status under Blakely v. Washington,
542 U.S. 296 (2004). However, he did not dispute in the district
court that he had three prior convictions for breaking and entering
and one conviction for arson, all committed on different occasions.
Keen’s argument on appeal is foreclosed by United States v.
Thompson, 421 F.3d 278, 282-83 (4th Cir. 2005) (holding that
sentencing court may impose § 924(e) sentence relying on prior
convictions neither charged nor admitted if facts necessary to
support enhancement are inherent in fact of convictions and no
additional fact finding is necessary), petition for cert. filed,
Oct. 25, 2005 (No. 05-7266). Keene also challenges the continued
validity of Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224
- 2 -
(1998). Our precedents similarly preclude this challenge to his
sentence. See United States v. Cheek, 415 F.3d 349, 350-51 (4th
Cir.) (holding that armed career criminal enhancement falls within
exception for prior convictions where facts were undisputed), cert.
denied, 126 S. Ct. 640 (2005).
We therefore affirm the sentence imposed by the district
court. 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.
AFFIRMED
- 3 -