United States v. Chavar Alec Harrison, 56 F.4th 1325

In 1997 Harrison pled guilty in Georgia to robbery by intimidation (a lesser included of armed robbery).
In 2020 Harrison was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) for possession of a firearm by a prohibited person; he pled guilty.
The PSR treated Harrison’s Georgia robbery-by-intimidation conviction as a "crime of violence," yielding a Guidelines base level 20 and a 37–46 month range.
Harrison objected, arguing Georgia’s robbery statute is indivisible and that the "sudden snatching" alternative is not a crime of violence; the district court accepted indivisibility, reduced the base level, and sentenced Harrison to 21 months.
The Government appealed the district court’s indivisibility ruling; the Eleventh Circuit held the Georgia robbery statute is divisible and that robbery by intimidation qualifies as a crime of violence under the Guidelines, vacating and remanding for resentencing.

Issue	Government's Argument	Harrison's Argument	Held
Whether Georgia’s robbery statute (O.C.G.A. § 16-8-40) is divisible	Alternatives (force, intimidation, sudden snatching) are separate elements → statute divisible	Alternatives are means of a single offense → statute indivisible	Statute is divisible; modified categorical approach applies
Whether robbery by intimidation is a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2	Robbery by intimidation matches the generic definition of robbery and is therefore an enumerated crime of violence	Because the statute includes sudden snatching (non-violent), robbery cannot categorically be a crime of violence	Robbery by intimidation qualifies as a crime of violence under the Guidelines’ enumerated clause; sentence vacated and remanded

Mathis v. United States, 579 U.S. 500 (2016) (framework for divisibility and use of the modified categorical approach)
Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) (distinguishes elements from means; defines divisible statutes)
Moncrieffe v. Holder, 569 U.S. 184 (2013) ("least-of-the-acts" principle in the categorical approach)
Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (2010) (categorical-approach context for predicate offenses)
United States v. Lockley, 632 F.3d 1238 (11th Cir. 2011) (defines generic robbery for comparators)
United States v. Eason, 953 F.3d 1184 (11th Cir. 2020) (review of categorical approach under the Guidelines)
United States v. Oliver, 962 F.3d 1311 (11th Cir. 2020) (elements v. means analysis in divisibility inquiries)
State v. Epps, 476 S.E.2d 579 (Ga. 1996) (Georgia definition of intimidation in robbery)
Millender v. State, 648 S.E.2d 777 (Ga. Ct. App. 2007) (discusses forms of robbery and lesser-included offenses)
Bellamy v. State, 750 S.E.2d 395 (Ga. Ct. App. 2013) (definition of robbery by force)