United States v. Antonio Levett Rucker, 705 F. App'x 188

Antonio Levett Rucker pled guilty to distribution of heroin in federal court and was sentenced.
At sentencing the district court applied the career-offender enhancement under USSG § 4B1.1 and imposed a 110‑month term.
One of Rucker’s prior convictions used to qualify him as a career offender was North Carolina felony assault by strangulation (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14‑32.4(b)).
Rucker did not object in district court to the career‑offender designation or to treating the strangulation assault as a crime of violence; he raised the issue for the first time on appeal.
The Fourth Circuit reviewed for plain error and analyzed whether North Carolina assault by strangulation categorically qualifies as a “crime of violence” under the Guidelines’ force clause.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether N.C. felony assault by strangulation is a "crime of violence" under the Guidelines’ force clause	Rucker: argues the prior offense is not a crime of violence and thus cannot support career‑offender status	Government: contends the offense necessarily involves the use of physical force and therefore qualifies as a crime of violence	Court: affirmed — Rucker failed to show a clear or obvious error; no realistic probability that NC courts would uphold a strangulation conviction absent physical force, so it qualifies under the force clause

United States v. Carthorne, 726 F.3d 503 (4th Cir. 2013) (plain‑error standard and framework for reviewing unpreserved Guidelines errors)
United States v. Winston, 850 F.3d 677 (4th Cir. 2017) (use of the categorical approach and requirement to examine realistic probability that a state would apply the statute to conduct lacking physical force)