UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 13-4347
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DANTE FOSTER, a/k/a Donte Foster,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland, at Baltimore. William D. Quarles, Jr., District
Judge. (1:12-cr-00319-WDQ-1)
Submitted: March 28, 2014 Decided: April 7, 2014
Before MOTZ, KING, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Gary E. Proctor, LAW OFFICE OF GARY E. PROCTOR, LLC, Baltimore,
Maryland, for Appellant. Rod J. Rosenstein, United States
Attorney, Michael C. Hanlon, Assistant United States Attorney,
Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Dante Foster appeals the district court’s judgment
sentencing him to 174 months’ imprisonment for possession of a
firearm by a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) (2012),
and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2012). On appeal, Foster
argues that the district court improperly used a prior Maryland
state court conviction to enhance his criminal history category.
He also argues that the district court’s sentence is
procedurally unreasonable because the court failed to explain
its reasons for overruling his objection to the 1994 conviction.
For the reasons that follow, we affirm.
Foster argues that his state conviction was obtained
without the assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth
Amendment. When a defendant challenges a prior conviction on
this ground, he bears the burden of showing the invalidity of
the prior conviction. United States v. Collins, 415 F.3d 304,
316 (4th Cir. 2005). The defendant must overcome a presumption
that the state court informed him of his right to counsel as it
was required to do, and that, if he was not represented, it was
because he waived his right to counsel. See Parke v. Raley, 506
U.S. 20, 28-34 (1992). We review de novo the district court’s
ruling on a claim that a prior conviction is invalid for lack of
2
counsel. United States v. Hondo, 366 F.3d 363, 365 (4th Cir.
2004).
Foster relies upon his unsworn statement at sentencing
that his prior conviction was obtained without counsel and the
presentence report’s (“PSR”) statement that “attorney
representation was unknown” as to the prior conviction. The
statement in the PSR has no impact on the presumption of
regularity accorded to prior convictions, and we have previously
held that the “self-serving testimony of the defendant” is
generally not sufficient to overcome that presumption. United
States v. Jones, 977 F.2d 105, 111 (4th Cir. 1997). This case
proves no exception. We therefore conclude that Foster has
failed to prove the invalidity of his prior state conviction.
Foster’s argument that the district court was required
to more fully explain its reasons for rejecting his argument
also fails. We find that the district court’s handling of this
matter, while sparse, was not erroneous.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment below. We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the material before this
court and argument will not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3