US v. Javar Sutton

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:08-cr-00165-TDS-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [998689069].. [09-5082]

Appeal: 09-5082

Document: 20

Date Filed: 09/29/2011

Page: 1 of 4

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-5082

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
JAVAR EUGENE SUTTON,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle
District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder,
District Judge. (1:08-cr-00165-TDS-1)

Submitted:

September 20, 2011

Decided:

September 29, 2011

Before KEENAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, William C. Ingram,
First Assistant Federal Public Defender, Greensboro, North
Carolina, for Appellant.
Anna Mills Wagoner, United States
Attorney, Anand P. Ramaswamy, Assistant United States Attorney,
Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 09-5082

Document: 20

Date Filed: 09/29/2011

Page: 2 of 4

PER CURIAM:
Javar Eugene Sutton pled guilty to unlawful possession
of a firearm by a convicted felon and was sentenced as an armed
career criminal to a term of 180 months’ imprisonment.
U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(e) (2006);
Manual § 4B1.4 (2008).

See 18

U.S. Sentencing Guidelines

On appeal, Sutton contends that one of

his predicate convictions for armed career criminal status was
not

punishable

by
was

more

than

incorrectly

one

year

of

imprisonment

sentenced

as

an

armed

and

therefore

he

career

criminal.

In light of our decision in United States v. Simmons,

___ F.3d ___, 2011 WL 3607266 (4th Cir. Aug. 17, 2011) (en
banc), we vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing.
Under
criminal

if

convictions

§ 924(e),

he
for

a

violates
a

serious

defendant

is

§ 922(g)(1)
drug

and

offense

or

an

armed

has

career
prior

violent

a

three

felony

“punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year[.]”
See 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B).

In the district court, Sutton

conceded that he had two predicate convictions, but argued that
his 2005 consolidated convictions for breaking and entering, and
larceny after breaking and entering, for which he received a
sentence of 4-5 months’ imprisonment, could not serve as the
third

predicate

“felony,”

as

conviction

defined

in

because

§ 922(g)

and

neither

offense

§ 924(e).

Under

was

a

North

Carolina law, both offenses were Class H felonies and Sutton was
2

Appeal: 09-5082

in

Document: 20

criminal

structured

Date Filed: 09/29/2011

history

category

sentencing

Page: 3 of 4

II.

scheme,

Under
the

the

North

presumptive

Carolina

range

of

punishment for a defendant with a Class H felony in criminal
history category II is 5-6 months.
1340.17(c)-(d).

(setting

out

See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-

minimum

and

maximum

sentences

applicable under North Carolina’s structured sentencing regime).
If aggravating factors are found, the maximum sentence is 10-12
months.

Sutton argued that, because his sentence was in the

mitigated

range

4-5

months,

the

factors,

mitigating

of

and

thus

could

he

judge
not

must

have

found

have

received

a

sentence of more than one year. *
The district court found that Sutton’s argument was
foreclosed by United States v. Harp, 406 F.3d 242, 246 (4th Cir.
2005).

The court imposed a sentence of 180 months, below the

Guidelines

range,

finding

that

Sutton’s

current

age

and

“relative age at the time the various prior criminal convictions
were

incurred”

were

mitigating

factors.

Subsequently,

we

overruled Harp with an en banc decision in Simmons, sustaining a
similar argument in favor of the defendant.

*

We observe that even if aggravating factors were present,
the maximum sentence for a defendant like Sutton, with a
criminal history category of II, is 12 months imprisonment, and
thus not “more than one year,” as required by § 924(e)(2)(B).

3

Appeal: 09-5082

Document: 20

In
sentence

light

imposed

resentencing.

Date Filed: 09/29/2011

of

our

by

the

holding

in

district

Page: 4 of 4

Simmons,
court

we

and

vacate
remand

the
for

We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials
before

the

court

and

argument

would

not

aid

the

decisional

process.
VACATED AND REMANDED

4