UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-4137
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
v.
FREDERICK GREEN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Greenville. Malcolm J. Howard,
Senior District Judge. (5:10-cr-00372-H-1)
Submitted: January 22, 2013 Decided: January 29, 2013
Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Thomas P. McNamara, Federal Public Defender, Stephen C. Gordon,
Assistant Federal Public Defender, Raleigh, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Thomas G. Walker, United States Attorney, Jennifer P.
May-Parker, Yvonne V. Watford-McKinney, Assistant United States
Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Frederick Green pled guilty to one count of possession
of a prohibited object in prison, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§ 1791(a)(2) (2006). The district court sentenced Green to
forty months in prison, to run consecutive to his current
federal sentence. Green timely appeals. We affirm.
Green asserts that the Double Jeopardy Clause protects
him from being indicted for the same misconduct that resulted in
prison disciplinary sanctions. We have previously rejected this
argument. Patterson v. United States, 183 F.2d 327, 328 (4th
Cir. 1950); see also United States v. Simpson, 546 F.3d 394, 398
(6th Cir. 2008) (collecting cases and holding: “The Double
Jeopardy Clause was not intended to inhibit prison discipline,
and disciplinary changes in prison conditions do not preclude
subsequent criminal punishment for the same misconduct.”);
United States v. Brown, 59 F.3d 102, 103-04 (9th Cir. 1995)
(same).
Green also argues that possession of a shank in prison
should not be considered a crime of violence for career offender
purposes. He urges this court to reconsider our holding to the
contrary in United States v. Mobley, 687 F.3d 625 (4th Cir.
2012), cert. denied, No. 12-7239, 2013 WL 57456 (U.S. Jan. 7,
2013). In Mobley, we held that “we agree with the Fifth,
Eighth, and Tenth Circuits that possession of a shank in prison,
2
in contravention of § 1791(a)(2), constitutes a crime of
violence under § 4B1.2(a)(2) of the Guidelines.” Mobley, 687
F.3d at 630-31. Green’s argument that we should reconsider this
decision must fail, as “[a] panel of this court cannot overrule,
explicitly or implicitly, the precedent set by a prior panel of
this court. Only the Supreme Court or this court sitting en
banc can do that.” Watkins v. SunTrust Mortg., Inc., 663 F.3d
232, 241 (4th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted).
We accordingly affirm the district court 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