UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 06-4668
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
MICHAEL TILLMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Chief
District Judge. (3:05-cr-00942-JFA)
Submitted: January 8, 2007 Decided: January 26, 2007
Before NIEMEYER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
John H. Hare, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellant. Reginald I. Lloyd, United States Attorney,
C. Todd Hagins, Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Michael Tillman pled guilty to a one-count indictment
charging him with being a felon in possession of a firearm in
violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2000). Under the Armed Career
Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C.A. § 924(e) (West 2000 & Supp. 2006),
Tillman was sentenced to the statutorily-mandated minimum sentence
of 180 months of imprisonment. He appeals his sentence, arguing:
(1) his sentence was unconstitutionally enhanced because his prior
convictions were not charged in the indictment or proven to the
jury beyond a reasonable doubt, (2) his sentence was also
unconstitutionally enhanced because specific attributes of his
prior convictions (i.e., that the offenses were “violent felonies”
committed on “occasions different from one another”) were not
charged nor proven to a jury, and (3) his South Carolina conviction
for failure to stop for a blue light was improperly treated as a
predicate “violent felony” for purposes of the ACCA. We affirm.
All of Tillman’s arguments are foreclosed by controlling
circuit precedent. Affirming the continued validity of
Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998), this court
has held that prior convictions may be used as the basis for an
armed career criminal sentence and need not be charged in the
indictment, admitted by the defendant during the plea colloquy, or
proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. United States v.
Cheek, 415 F.3d 349, 352-54 (4th Cir.), cert denied, 126 S. Ct. 640
- 2 -
(2005). This court has also ruled that the nature and occasion of
prior offenses are facts inherent in the convictions and the
government is not required to allege prior convictions in the
indictment or submit proof of them to a jury. United States v.
Thompson, 421 F.3d 278, 285-87 (4th Cir. 2005). Furthermore, in
United States v. James, 337 F.3d 387, 390-91 (2003), we held that
a conviction for failure to stop for a blue light pursuant to S.C.
Code Ann. § 56-5-750 constitutes a violent felony for enhancement
purposes under the ACCA.
Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. 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 -