United States v. Aaron Johnson

Case: 13-10498 Date Filed: 09/05/2013 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 13-10498 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket No. 9:12-cr-80113-KAM-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus AARON JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (September 5, 2013) Before TJOFLAT, PRYOR and MARTIN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 13-10498 Date Filed: 09/05/2013 Page: 2 of 2 Aaron Johnson appeals his 180-month sentence after pleading guilty to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1). Johnson’s sentence was the mandatory minimum under § 924(e)(1), which states that a person who violates § 922(g) and has three previous convictions for a violent felony or serious drug offense, shall be imprisoned for not less than fifteen years. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). Johnson’s only argument on appeal is that his sentence “runs afoul of the Fifth and Sixth Amendment[s],” because the indictment did not identify the three prior convictions that supported the application of § 924(e)(1)’s mandatory minimum. However, as Johnson acknowledges, his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 118 S. Ct. 1219 (1998). In that case, the Supreme Court held that prior convictions “relevant only to the sentencing of an offender found guilty of the charged crime” do not need to be charged in an indictment or proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury. Id. at 228–47, 118 S. Ct. at 1223–33. Almendarez-Torres “remains good law.” United States v. Weeks, 711 F.3d 1255, 1259 (11th Cir. 2013). For these reasons, Johnson’s sentence is AFFIRMED. 2