UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 07-4712
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
GERALD THOMAS EVANS,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at New Bern. Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:05-cr-00249-BO)
Submitted: April 29, 2009 Decided: June 5, 2009
Before NIEMEYER, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Walter H. Paramore, III, WALTER H. PARAMORE, III, P.C.,
Jacksonville, North Carolina, for Appellant. George E. B.
Holding, United States Attorney, Anne M. Hayes, Banumathi
Rangarajan, Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North
Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Gerald Thomas Evans pled guilty pursuant to a written
plea agreement to possessing a firearm after being convicted of
a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006). The
court sentenced Evans to 180 months in prison, and Evans timely
appealed. Evans’ attorney filed a brief in accordance with
Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), certifying that there
are no meritorious grounds for appeal, but questioning whether
the district court erred in finding that Evans was an armed
career criminal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2006). Evans
raised the same arguments in his pro se supplemental brief. The
Government filed a brief urging affirmance. Finding no
reversible error, we affirm.
Evans contends that the district court erred when it
found by a preponderance of the evidence that he had at least
three previous convictions for violent offenses and was thus
subject to enhanced penalties as an armed career criminal
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). The presentence investigation
report identified six predicate offenses. Evans initially
objected to reliance on four of these convictions, but abandoned
his objections to two of them at the sentencing hearing. As to
the remaining two convictions, both for breaking and entering,
Evans asserts on appeal that the district court’s conclusion
2
that they qualified as predicate offenses under § 924(e) was
flawed.
We need not resolve Evans’ challenge to the district
court’s reliance on the two breaking and entering convictions.
Even if these convictions are excluded from consideration, the
four remaining convictions identified in the presentence report
were sufficient to support the finding that Evans qualified as
an armed career criminal. Thus, the district court did not err
in sentencing Evans to the statutory mandatory minimum term of
180 months imprisonment.
In accordance with Anders, we have reviewed the record
in this case and have found no meritorious issues for appeal.
We therefore affirm Evans’ conviction and sentence. This court
requires that counsel inform Evans, in writing, of the right to
petition the Supreme Court of the United States for further
review. If Evans requests that a petition be filed, but counsel
believes that such a petition would be frivolous, then counsel
may move in this court for leave to withdraw from
representation. Counsel’s motion must state that a copy thereof
was served on Evans.
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
3
before the court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED
4