355 So.3d 887
Fla.2022Background
- Fred Somers pleaded guilty in 2013 to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon; the district court applied the ACCA and imposed an enhanced sentence based on four prior "violent felony" convictions, including a 1998 Florida aggravated assault conviction under § 784.021(1)(a).
- Somers later challenged his ACCA enhancement under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing the Florida aggravated-assault offense can be committed recklessly and thus does not meet the ACCA elements clause requirement that the predicate offense have, as an element, the "use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another."
- The Eleventh Circuit, after the Supreme Court's Borden decision (holding recklessness cannot satisfy the ACCA elements clause), granted rehearing and certified two questions of Florida law to the Florida Supreme Court about the mens rea required by Fla. Stat. § 784.011(1).
- The certified questions asked whether the first element of Florida assault ("an intentional, unlawful threat . . . to do violence to the person of another") requires "specific intent" to direct the threat at another, and if not, what mens rea is required.
- The Florida Supreme Court held that § 784.011(1) — by its plain language and contemporaneous dictionary meanings of "threat" and "violence" — requires an intentional expression of intent to use physical force directed at another person, and therefore cannot be committed recklessly.
- Because assault under § 784.011(1) requires at least knowing or purposeful conduct (i.e., intentional direction of a threat at another), it satisfies the Borden mens rea requirement for the ACCA elements clause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the first element of Fla. Stat. § 784.011(1) requires intent to direct the threat at another (i.e., "specific intent" to target a person) | Somers: Florida assault can be committed recklessly and thus lacks the purposeful/knowing mens rea Borden requires for ACCA predicates | Government: The statute requires an intentional, communicated threat directed at another, satisfying Borden's requirement | The court: Yes — the first element requires intentional direction of a threat at another person; answer: affirmative |
| If not "specific intent," what mens rea is required for that element | Somers: At most general intent or recklessness | Government: At least knowing or purposeful intent to threaten another | The court: Assault requires at least knowing/purposeful conduct and cannot be committed recklessly |
Key Cases Cited
- Borden v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 1817 (2021) (plurality) (holding recklessness cannot satisfy ACCA elements clause; elements clause requires purposeful or knowing conduct)
- Somers v. United States, 15 F.4th 1049 (11th Cir. 2021) (Eleventh Circuit certified questions to Florida Supreme Court after Borden concerning mens rea of Fla. assault)
- Turner v. Warden, Coleman FCI, 709 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir. 2013) (Eleventh Circuit precedent treating Florida aggravated assault as involving an intentional threat)
- Debaun v. State, 213 So. 3d 747 (Fla. 2017) (statutory plain-meaning and dictionary-based interpretation principles applied by the Florida Supreme Court)