Recent Updates
April 28, 2010
State Must Prove Defendant's Knowledge of Driver's License Suspension
April 13, 2010
Sentencing Commission Votes to Eliminate Recent Criminal History Points
October 15, 2009
Consent to search inside of vehicle does not extend to locked containers
October 14, 2009
Making phone calls to get drugs for personal use not a felony
October 07, 2009
Duval County schools agree to reduce number of students getting arrested
Escape May not Qualify under Armed Career Criminal Act
July 09, 2009
Topic: Criminal
The Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) provides that a defendant sentenced for a violation of §922(g), who has three or more prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug crimes committed on occasions different from one another, faces a mandatory minimum prison sentence of fifteen years. In this case, United States v. Canty, 2009 WL 1616673 (11th Cir.), the Defendant had several prior convictions for escape, obstructing or opposing an officer with violence, possession with intent to sell cocaine, and carrying a concealed firearm. At his sentencing, the Defendant objected to an ACCA enhancement based on the concealed firearm conviction. The trial judge, believing that 11th Circuit precedent allowed him to consider the conviction, overruled the Defendant's objection.
On appeal, the court determined that the lower court improperly interpreted precedent. The definition of "crime of violence" in the ACCA is very similar to the definition in the Sentencing Guidelines, and carrying a concealed firearm is not a crime that should be considered. The Government then alleged that the Defendant's other convictions still qualified him for the enhancement. The Defendant responded to this argument claiming that escape is not a violent crime and that it was not committed on an occasion different from the obstruction charge.
The Court of Appeals did not reach the issue of whether the escape and obstruction crimes were "crimes of violence" because it held that there was not enough information in the record to indicating that they were committed on different occasions. From the record, the court determined that the crimes were committed on the same day and were listed on the same judgment. The Government urged the court to review the PSR, which described how the crimes were committed and supported the Government's position. However, the information it contained was based on arrest records and police reports, which the Defendant claimed were improper under Shepard. The Government opposed this position, however, the court found that the Government had waived any argument on the matter and held that the ACCA enhancement could not be applied to this Defendant.
Our firm is currently handling a case involving a similiar issue with a client who is labeled as an Armed Career Criminal. It is critical to get a client out from such a designation because the guidelines are often much less than the 15 year minimum mandatory, and therefore it can make a significant difference in the final sentence of the client.
