
    UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Joe Daniel ROBINSON, Appellant.
    No. 03-2626.
    United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
    Submitted March 9, 2004.
    Decided April 22, 2004.
    Before WOLLMAN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Joe Daniel Robinson pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). After finding that Robinson had three prior violent felony convictions, the district court sentenced him under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), imposing a term of imprisonment greater than the statutory maximum allowed for a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Robinson appeals, arguing that the ACCA does not apply because one of the convictions considered by the district court was actually a juvenile adjudication. He contends therefore that the sentence imposed by the district court violates due process. See Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000) (holding that other than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the statutory maximum must be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt). Whether a juvenile adjudication qualifies as a prior conviction under Apprendi is a question that we answered in the affirmative in United States v. Smalley, 294 F.3d 1030 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 537 U.S. 1114, 123 S.Ct. 870, 154 L.Ed.2d 790 (2003) (holding that a juvenile adjudication is a prior conviction for Apprendi purposes). Accordingly, the sentence is affirmed. 
      
      . The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota.
     