Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No. 13-4533
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western
District of North Carolina, at Charlotte.
Frank D. Whitney,
Chief District Judge. (3:10-cr-00069-FDW-1)
Submitted:
Decided:
January 8, 2015
Henderson
DEFENDERS
Carolina,
Attorney,
Asheville,
PER CURIAM:
Shirley
Ingram,
Jr.,
appeals
his
convictions
and
drug-trafficking
924(c)(1) (2012).
(1)
not
suppressing
offense,
in
violation
of
18
U.S.C.
found
following
third-party
career
(ACCA),
18
criminal,
U.S.C.
under
the
924(e)
Armed
(2012),
Career
by
Criminal
relying
on
Act
prior
Suppression claim
263, 269 (4th Cir. 2013), cert. denied, 134 S. Ct. 1572 (2014).
2
The
government
bears
the
burden
to
authority
warrantless
search
over
inspected.
of
proof
in
justifying
Id.
search
may
be
by
third
the
premises
justified
party
who
or
by
showing
possessed
effects
common
sought
to
be
United States v. Shrader, 675 F.3d 300, 306 (4th Cir. 2012).
However, a physically present inhabitants express refusal of
consent to a police search is dispositive as to him, regardless
of the consent of a fellow occupant.
U.S. 103, 122-23 (2006).
proving
consent,
and
we
for
clear
error
district
United
In
the
characteristics
mental capacity.
of
the
consenter,
such
as
her
prior
to
trial,
Ingram
moved
to
suppress
evidence seized from the search of his vehicle, arguing that his
mother, who had consented to the search, lacked the capacity to
do so.
consent
was
Randolph.
voluntary,
We
discern
the
no
search
was
reversible
unreasonable
error
in
the
under
district
Therefore,
we
affirm
the
district
courts
denial
of
sufficiency
of
the
evidence
faces
heavy
burden.
United
The jury
found
the
essential
reasonable doubt.
(4th
Cir.
2014)
elements
of
the
crime
beyond
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted).
[T]he
omitted).
378
(internal
(4th
Cir.)
quotations
4
marks
omitted),
cert.
denied,
135
S.
Ct.
305
(2014).
Thus,
[r]eversal
for
135,
138
(4th
Cir.
2010)
(internal
quotation
marks
omitted).
Section
924(c)
requires
the
government
to
present
F.3d
omitted).
at
317
(internal
quotation
marks
and
Pineda,
alteration
an
claims
ACCA
that
sentence
the
because
district
his
court
prior
North
erred
by
Carolina
(2011),
purposes
of
did
ACCA.
not
count
as
Our
recent
predicate
decision
in
convictions
United
States
for
v.
Mungro, 754 F.3d 267 (4th Cir. 2014), cert. denied, __ S. Ct.
__, 83 U.S.L.W. 3328 (U.S. Dec. 1, 2014) (No. 14-6886), holding
that
14-54(a)
convictions
qualify
5
as
ACCA
predicate
he
was
improperly
designated
an
career
criminal
because his prior convictions were not submitted to the jury and
proved beyond a reasonable doubtis foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998).
Therefore, the
are
adequately
presented
in
the
materials
before this court and argument would not aid in the decisional
process.
AFFIRMED