US v. Natwoine Austin
Filing
UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to remand case [998660815-2] Originating case number: 3:10-cr-00099-FDW-1 Copies to all parties and the district court. [998692975]. [11-4489]
Appeal: 11-4489
Document: 20
Date Filed: 10/04/2011
Page: 1 of 3
UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 11-4489
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
NATWOINE AUSTIN,
Defendant - Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
District Judge. (3:10-cr-00099-FDW-1)
Submitted:
September 29, 2011
Decided:
October 4, 2011
Before KING, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.
Reversed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Matthew Segal, Federal Defender, Asheville, North Carolina, for
Appellant. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney,
Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
Appeal: 11-4489
Document: 20
Date Filed: 10/04/2011
Page: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Natwoine
conditional
Austin
guilty
plea
was
to
convicted
possession
of
following
a
firearm
his
by
a
convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (2006).
The
district
imprisonment.
court’s
court
sentenced
Austin
to
twenty-one
months’
Austin reserved the right to appeal the district
determination
that
his
prior
North
Carolina
state
conviction for possession of a schedule I controlled substance
qualified as a felony for the purpose of adjudging him guilty
under § 922(g)(1).
Austin timely appealed.
Prior to submitting
an opening brief, Austin moved to vacate his conviction and to
remand the case to the district court, arguing that his North
Carolina conviction was not punishable by imprisonment for a
term exceeding one year and, thus, that the conviction could not
serve as the necessary predicate for the § 922(g)(1) charge.
In
light of our decision in United States v. Simmons, 649 F.3d 237,
2011 WL 3607266 (4th Cir. Aug. 17, 2011) (en banc), we reverse
and remand.
Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), it is unlawful for any
person convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a
term exceeding one year to possess a firearm.
Austin’s prior
North
punishable
Carolina
state
conviction
was
imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.
§
15A-1340.17(c)-(d)
(2009)
(setting
2
out
not
by
See N.C. Gen. Stat.
minimum
and
maximum
Appeal: 11-4489
Document: 20
sentences
Date Filed: 10/04/2011
applicable
sentencing scheme).
district
States
court,
v.
it
North
Carolina’s
structured
When Austin raised this argument in the
was
Harp,
Subsequently,
under
Page: 3 of 3
foreclosed
406
however,
F.3d
we
by
242,
overruled
our
decision
in
246
(4th
Cir.
Harp
with
our
United
2005).
en
banc
decision in Simmons, in which we sustained a similar argument in
favor of the defendant.
In view of our holding in Simmons, we
reverse Austin’s conviction, deny as moot his motion to vacate,
and
remand
the
proceedings. *
forthwith.
legal
before
The
to
clerk
the
is
district
directed
court
to
for
issue
further
the
mandate
We dispense with oral argument because the facts and
contentions
the
case
court
are
adequately
and
argument
presented
would
not
in
aid
the
the
materials
decisional
process.
REVERSED AND REMANDED
*
We of course do not fault the Government or the district
court for their reliance upon, and application of, unambiguous
circuit authority at the time of Austin’s indictment and
conviction.
3
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?