527 F. App'x 354
6th Cir.2013Background
- Smith-Hodges was sentenced to 188 months for being a felon in possession of a firearm after a February 2009 robbery.
- The PSR added a two-level enhancement for physically restraining a victim and a seven-level ACCA enhancement, yielding a total offense level of 31 and a VI CH.
- The district court overruled Smith-Hodges’s objections to both the physical-restraint enhancement and the ACCA, and imposed the 188-month sentence.
- On appeal, Smith-Hodges challenges the § 3A1.3 physical-restraint enhancement as improperly applied and argues ACCA’s residual clause is unconstitutionally vague.
- The court reviews for procedural error in sentencing and for clear error on facts used to enhance the sentence, with de novo review of legal conclusions.
- The court affirms, upholding the physical-restraint enhancement and rejecting the residual-clause challenge based on controlling circuit law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the § 3A1.3 physical-restraint enhancement properly applied? | Smith-Hodges contends the enhancement overstates restraint. | Smith-Hodges argues the facts do not show physical restraint. | Yes; the enhancement was properly applied |
| Is the residual clause of the ACCA unconstitutionally vague? | Smith-Hodges invokes vagueness under the ACCA residual clause. | The Sixth Circuit has repeatedly rejected this challenge. | No error; sentence sustained under ACCA |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Coleman, 664 F.3d 1047 (6th Cir. 2012) (physical-restraint enhancement can apply where victim is moved to a more vulnerable position)
- United States v. Jackson, 635 F.3d 205 (6th Cir. 2011) (review of factual findings for clear error; de novo on legal conclusions)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (Supreme Ct. 2007) (procedural reasonableness requires correct calculation of guidelines range)
- United States v. Taylor, 696 F.3d 628 (6th Cir. 2012) (rejects vagueness challenge to ACCA residual clause)
- United States v. Drew, 200 F.3d 871 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (discusses physical-restraint interpretation)
- United States v. Anglin, 169 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 1999) (whether displaying a gun and ordering compliance constitutes restraint)
- United States v. Miera, 539 F.3d 1232 (10th Cir. 2008) (limits of physical-restraint interpretation in robbery cases)