or special assessment was imposed for Count Eight. Thus, we hold that Shorter stands convicted of only one 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g) offense. This result is in line with our decision in United States v. Jones, 204 F.3d 541 (4th Cir.2000). In Jones, the defendant had received concurrent sentences for possession of cocaine base and possession of cocaine base with the intent to distribute. Concluding that the possession offense was a lesser included offense of the possession with the intent to distribute charge, we held that the former “should have been merged into the possession with intent to distribute conviction” and therefore ordered that the sentence for the possession conviction be vacated. Jones, 204 F.3d at 544; see United States v. Cunningham, 145 F.3d 1385, 1399 (D.C.Cir.1998) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Throneburg, 921 F.2d 654,
holding that all convictions remain valid for immigration purposes holding that defendants sixth amendment right to trial by a jury was not violated by district courts reliance on his prior convictions for purposes of sentencing under the acca even though convictions were neither charged in indictment nor admitted recognizing that the district court could merge duplicative convictions after the jury verdicts are recorded holding that duplicative  922g convictions should have been merged for sentencing purposes holding that trial court apparently merged two robbery offenses before sentencing as it imposed only one 20year sentence