USA v. Patrick Hymon

Filing

Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Patrick Hymon. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam.

Case: 14-10142

Date Filed: 11/21/2014

Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 14-10142
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 6:13-cr-00118-GAP-TBS-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PATRICK HYMON,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
________________________
(November 21, 2014)

Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 14-10142

Date Filed: 11/21/2014

Page: 2 of 2

Patrick Hymon appeals his 180-month sentence, imposed after he pleaded
guilty to possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon in violation
of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2), and 924(e)(1). On appeal, Hymon argues the
district court violated his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights by enhancing his
sentence, pursuant to the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(e)(1), based on prior convictions that were not charged in the indictment nor
proven beyond a reasonable doubt.1 Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.
224, 226-27 (1998), held that the fact of a prior conviction is not an “element” of
the crime that must be charged in the indictment and proven beyond a reasonable
doubt. Therefore, the district court did not err in enhancing Hymon’s sentence.
Accordingly, we affirm.
AFFIRMED.

1

We review constitutional sentencing issues de novo. United States v. Steed, 548 F.3d
961, 978 (11th Cir. 2008).
2