Jones
United States v. Jones
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
Michael Paul Jones appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea to possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1). He contends that district court erred in imposing a fifteen-year mandatory minimum term under the Aimed Career Criminal Act on the basis that he had at least three previous convictions for a serious drug offense. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
Jones contends that his five prior Oregon convictions for delivery of a controlled substance were not serious drug offenses under 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e)(2)(A)(ii) because, even though the maximum statutory term was ten years under Or.Rev.Stat. § 161.605(2), the state sentencing guidelines capped the term at ninety months. As Jones acknowledges, his contention is foreclosed. See United States v. Mayer, 560 F.3d 948, 962-63 (9th Cir.2009); United States v. Parry, 479 F.3d 722, 724-26 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 249 , 169 L.Ed.2d 183 (2007); see also United States v. Rodriquez, — U.S.-, 128 S.Ct. 1783, 1792 , 170 L.Ed.2d 719 (2008) (holding that guidelines cap does not decrease maximum term of imprisonment for purposes of ACCA).