United States v. James Charles Danforth

977 F.2d 592 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. James Charles DANFORTH, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-30355. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Oct. 5, 1992. * Decided Oct. 9, 1992. Before FARRIS, LEAVY and TROTT, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 James Danforth appeals from his sentence, imposed following a jury trial, for being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922 (g)(1) and 924(e). Danforth contends that the district court erred by sentencing him as a career offender under the United States Sentencing Guidelines § 4B1.2. We vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. 3 We review de novo the district court's interpretation of the Guidelines. United States v. Huffhines, 967 F.2d 314, 320 (9th Cir.1992). Under the Guidelines, a defendant is considered a career offender if his instant offense is a violent felony and he has two prior felony…