US v. Darrian Jarrell Abbott

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 1:13-cr-00426-CCE-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999712394].. [14-4764]

Download PDF
Appeal: 14-4764 Doc: 32 Filed: 12/04/2015 Pg: 1 of 2 UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 14-4764 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. DARRIAN JARRELL ABBOTT, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Catherine C. Eagles, District Judge. (1:13-cr-00426-CCE-1) Submitted: November 13, 2015 Decided: December 4, 2015 Before MOTZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. Louis C. Allen, Federal Public Defender, Mireille P. Clough, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellant. Ripley Rand, United States Attorney, Robert A.J. Lang, Assistant United States Attorney, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Appeal: 14-4764 Doc: 32 Filed: 12/04/2015 Pg: 2 of 2 PER CURIAM: Darrian Jarrell Abbott appeals from his 180-month sentence imposed pursuant to his guilty plea to one count of possession of ammunition by a felon. He was sentenced as an armed career criminal under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2012), based in part on a North Carolina conviction for Larceny from the Person. On appeal, both parties agree that Larceny from the Person is no longer a qualifying offense under § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii) after the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). Accordingly, remand for resentencing. we vacate Abbott’s sentence and 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 2

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?