[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FILED
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
May 30, 2008
No. 07-14719 THOMAS K. KAHN
Non-Argument Calendar CLERK
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 07-20096-CR-PCH
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
MARK BELIDOR,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
_________________________
(May 30, 2008)
Before ANDERSON, DUBINA and HULL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Appellant Mark Belidor (“Belidor”) appeals his sentence of 226 months
imprisonment for being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C
§§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e). On appeal, Belidor argues that the district court erred by
sentencing him as an armed career criminal under § 924(e) because: (a) his prior
convictions for resisting arrest with violence did not meet the statutory definition
of “crimes of violence,” as required by the statute, and (b) the government did not
plead and prove to a jury the specific circumstances of his prior convictions.
We are precluded from reviewing an alleged defect, even for plain error,
when a party has invited the error. United States v. Harris, 443 F.3d 822, 823-24
(11th Cir. 2006). “The doctrine of invited error is implicated when a party induces
or invites the district court into making an error.” Id.
Because Belidor stated at his sentencing hearing that he agreed with his
classification as an armed career criminal, he invited the error of which he now
complains, and, thus, we are precluded from reviewing the alleged error.
Therefore, we conclude Belidor is entitled to no relief and we affirm his sentence.
AFFIRMED.
2