United States v. Ira Jerome Millender, Jr., AKA Ira Jerome Millander, Jr. , 458 F. App'x 791 ( 2012 )


Menu:
  •               IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    FILED
    ___________________________ U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
    JANUARY 24, 2012
    No. 11-12856
    JOHN LEY
    Non-Argument Calendar
    CLERK
    ___________________________
    D.C. Docket No. 3:11-cr-00010-LC-1
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    IRA JEROME MILLENDER, JR.,
    a.k.a. Ira Jerome Millander, Jr.,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    ___________________________
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Northern District of Florida
    ___________________________
    (January 24, 2012)
    Before CARNES, WILSON and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:
    Ira Jerome Millender, Jr., appeals his sentence of 180 months’
    imprisonment, followed by 5 years of supervised release, imposed after he pled
    guilty to possessing firearms as a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
    § 922(g)(1). The district court enhanced Millender’s sentence under the Armed
    Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), because it found he had four
    qualifying predicate convictions. Millender argues that in applying the ACCA, the
    district court erred by counting his 1992 conviction on two counts of aggravated
    battery as two separate prior convictions.
    “We review de novo a district court’s determination of whether two crimes
    constitute a single criminal episode or two separate felonies for purposes of
    section 924(e).” United States v. Spears, 
    443 F.3d 1358
    , 1360 (11th Cir. 2006).
    “Under the ACCA, a defendant convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) is
    subject to § 924(e)(1)’s mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen years if the
    defendant has ‘three previous convictions . . . for a violent felony or a serious drug
    offense, or both, committed on occasions different from one another.’” United
    States v. Sneed, 
    600 F.3d 1326
    , 1329 (11th Cir. 2010) (quoting 18 U.S.C.
    § 924(e)(1)). While Millender argues the district court erred in counting the 1992
    conviction as two separate prior convictions, both he and the Government
    recognize that Millender would have three qualifying predicate offenses under the
    2
    ACCA, even if the district court had not committed the purported counting error.1
    Therefore, the alleged error would have had no impact on Millender’s substantive
    rights or the outcome of his sentencing proceedings. Accordingly, we conclude
    that any error in applying the ACCA was harmless and affirm the sentence.
    AFFIRMED.
    1
    Millender claims that one of the other predicate convictions is invalid but does not
    appear to have challenged that conviction here or in any other court.
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 11-12856

Citation Numbers: 458 F. App'x 791

Judges: Black, Carnes, Per Curiam, Wilson

Filed Date: 1/24/2012

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/5/2023