US v. Markie Jone

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 5:15-cr-00089-BO-1. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency [999939740]. [15-4745]

Appeal: 15-4745

Doc: 70

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 1 of 3

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-4745

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
MARKIE DEVON JONES,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of North Carolina, at Raleigh.
Terrence W. Boyle,
District Judge. (5:15-cr-00089-BO-1)

Submitted:

September 29, 2016

Decided:

October 3, 2016

Before SHEDD, KEENAN, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert J. Higdon, Jr., WILLIAMS MULLEN, Raleigh, North Carolina,
for Appellant.
John Stuart Bruce, Acting United States
Attorney, Jennifer P. May-Parker, Kristine L. Fritz, Assistant
United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 15-4745

Doc: 70

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 2 of 3

PER CURIAM:
Markie

Devon

possession
(2012).

of

a

Jones

pled

firearm,

in

guilty

being

of

violation

to

18

a

U.S.C.

felon

in

§ 922(g)

Based on Jones’ North Carolina breaking and entering

convictions, the district court designated Jones an armed career
criminal, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2012), and sentenced him to the
statutory minimum 180 months’ imprisonment.

On appeal, Jones

argues that the district court erred in denying his pre-plea
motion for a continuance and in designating him an armed career
criminal.

For the reasons that follow, we affirm.

Jones

asserts

that

the

district

court

violated

his

due

process rights by denying his motion for a continuance at his
arraignment.

“When a defendant pleads guilty, he waives all

nonjurisdictional defects in the proceedings conducted prior to
entry

of

invalid.

the

plea,”

aside

from

a

claim

that

the

plea

was

United States v. Moussaoui, 591 F.3d 263, 279 (4th

Cir. 2010).

Jones, who does not dispute that his plea was

valid, has therefore waived review of this issue.
Jones

also

argues

that

his

North

Carolina

breaking

and

entering convictions do not qualify as predicate offenses to
support his armed career criminal sentence.

This argument is

foreclosed by our decision in United States v. Mungro, 754 F.3d
267, 272 (4th Cir. 2014) (holding that North Carolina breaking

2

Appeal: 15-4745

Doc: 70

Filed: 10/03/2016

Pg: 3 of 3

and entering categorically qualifies as burglary under 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(e)(2)(B)(ii)).
Finally,

Jones

claims

that

the

district

court

erred

in

failing to state which offenses were ACCA predicates.

We reject

this

noted

argument

sentencing

that

because

Jones’

Jones

counsel

“ha[s]

three

expressly

breaking

and

at

entering

offenses that alone qualify” as ACCA predicates.
We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court.
dispense

with

contentions

are

oral

argument

adequately

because

presented

in

the
the

facts

We

and

legal

materials

before

this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

3