UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 14-4140
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DAVID CARLTON NORTON, JR.,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen,
Jr., Chief District Judge. (1:13-cr-00213-WO-1)
Submitted: September 29, 2014 Decided: October 10, 2014
Before WILKINSON, SHEDD, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Stephen F. Wallace, WALLACE LAW FIRM, High Point, North
Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney,
Lisa B. Boggs, Angela H. Miller, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
David Carlton Norton, Jr., pled guilty, pursuant to a
plea agreement, to possession of firearms by a convicted felon,
in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2012). The district
court deemed Norton an armed career criminal and sentenced him
to the statutory minimum sentence of 180 months’ imprisonment.
See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1) (2012). Norton appeals his sentence,
arguing that the district court improperly classified him as an
armed career criminal. We affirm.
When considering whether the district court properly
sentenced a defendant as an armed career criminal, we review the
court’s legal conclusions de novo and its factual findings for
clear error. United States v. McDowell, 745 F.3d 115, 120 (4th
Cir. 2014), petition for cert. filed, ___ U.S.L.W. ___ (U.S.
June 16, 2014) (No. 13-10640). Under the Armed Career Criminal
Act (“ACCA”), if a defendant is convicted of being a felon in
possession of a firearm and has sustained at least three prior
convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses
committed on occasions different from one another, the defendant
is subject to being sentenced as an armed career criminal.
18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1).
Norton contends that his two North Carolina common law
robbery convictions should be counted as only one predicate
offense for the purpose of the armed career criminal enhancement
2
because they were part of a consolidated judgment. Although we
held in United States v. Davis, 720 F.3d 215 (4th Cir. 2013),
that a consolidated sentence for multiple North Carolina
convictions is to be treated as a single sentence for purposes
of the career offender enhancement, id. at 219, Davis does not
apply in the context of the ACCA. We reiterate that “[n]othing
in § 924(e) or the Guidelines suggests that offenses must be
tried or sentenced separately in order to be counted as separate
predicate offenses,” and that “[t]he only requirement [for
applying the armed career criminal enhancement] is that the
predicate offenses be committed on occasions different from one
another.” United States v. Samuels, 970 F.2d 1312, 1315 (4th
Cir. 1992) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Accordingly, we conclude that the district court
correctly classified Norton as an armed career criminal and
affirm the district court’s judgment. We dispense with oral
argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately
presented in the materials before this court and argument would
not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
3