Opinion
22-4537
12-27-2023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. TIMOTHY JAROD GRIER, Defendant-Appellant.
Marilyn G. Ozer, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant. Sandra J. Hairston, United States Attorney, Margaret M. Reece, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
UNPUBLISHED
Submitted: December 19, 2023
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:21-cr-00385-WO-1)
ON BRIEF:
Marilyn G. Ozer, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, for Appellant.
Sandra J. Hairston, United States Attorney, Margaret M. Reece, Assistant United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Timothy Jarod Grier pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute fentanyl, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C). The district court sentenced Grier below the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range to 144 months' imprisonment. On appeal, Grier challenges his career offender designation, arguing that his prior North Carolina convictions pursuant to N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-95(a)(1) do not qualify as controlled substance offenses after United States v. Campbell, 22 F.4th 438 (4th Cir. 2022), for purposes of U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual § 4B1.2 (2021). We affirm.
This court considers de novo whether a prior conviction is a controlled substance offense under the Guidelines. United States v. Miller, 75 F.4th 215, 228-29 (4th Cir. 2023). In Miller, we held that N.C. Gen. Stat. § 90-95(a) "is a categorical match" with the definition of a controlled substance offense in the Guidelines. Id. at 230-31. Thus, the district court did not err in finding that Grier's prior North Carolina convictions qualified as controlled substance offenses under USSG § 4B1.2.
Accordingly, we affirm the criminal judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED