United States v. Bowman
21-40467
| 5th Cir. | Mar 2, 2022Background
- Bowman pleaded guilty to possessing a firearm after a felony and was sentenced to 210 months' imprisonment plus five years supervised release.
- The district court applied the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), based on Bowman's prior Texas convictions: simple robbery, aggravated robbery, and aggravated assault.
- Bowman argued on appeal that the Texas robbery and assault statutes are indivisible and therefore his prior convictions could not be ACCA predicates because the statutes permit conviction based on recklessness.
- Because Bowman raised the argument for the first time on appeal, the Fifth Circuit reviewed under the plain-error standard (error that is clear or obvious and affects substantial rights).
- The panel relied on precedents holding the Texas robbery and assault statutes divisible and applied the modified categorical approach using indictments and record documents to identify the crimes of conviction.
- Bowman conceded his simple-robbery convictions were for robbery-by-threat, which qualifies; the court found no clear or obvious error in treating his aggravated-assault conviction as a violent felony and affirmed the ACCA enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Texas robbery statute is divisible for ACCA purposes | Government: statute is divisible; modified categorical approach applies | Bowman: statute indivisible, so cannot be ACCA predicate | Court: statute is divisible (per Garrett); modified categorical approach applies |
| Whether Texas assault statute is divisible | Government: statute divisible; qualifies as violent felony | Bowman: statute indivisible and can be committed recklessly | Court: statute is divisible (per Torres); no clear or obvious error finding violent felony |
| Whether prior convictions qualify as ACCA violent felonies (recklessness concern) | Government: at least three convictions qualify (robbery-by-threat and aggravated assault) | Bowman: convictions could rest on reckless conduct and thus not violent felonies | Court: Bowman conceded robbery-by-threat; aggravated assault characterization not clearly erroneous; ACCA predicates supported |
| Standard of review for new appellate argument | Government: plain-error review applies | Bowman: (urges merits of divisibility/recklessness) | Court: applied plain-error standard and found no reversible error |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Garrett, 24 F.4th 485 (5th Cir. 2022) (holds Texas robbery statute divisible)
- United States v. Torres, 923 F.3d 420 (5th Cir. 2019) (holds Texas assault statute divisible)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (explains categorical and modified categorical approaches)
- Puckett v. United States, 556 U.S. 129 (2009) (plain-error review elements)
- United States v. Massey, 858 F.3d 380 (5th Cir. 2017) (ACCA-predicate qualification reviewed de novo generally)
- United States v. Castaneda-Lozoya, 812 F.3d 457 (5th Cir. 2016) (discusses preservation and plain-error review)