United States v. Chitwood
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6845
11th Cir.2012Background
- Chitwood pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine and obstruction of an officer; sentenced to 188 months.
- The district court treated Chitwood as a career offender under § 4B1.1 based on Georgia false imprisonment and aggravated assault convictions.
- PSR recommended career offender range of 188–235 months; district court adopted this for sentencing after applying a modified categorical approach to the false imprisonment conviction.
- Chitwood objected that Georgia false imprisonment (Ga. Code Ann. § 16-5-41) is not a crime of violence under § 4B1.2(a)(2) and that the district court failed to use Shepard documents.
- The government argued the conviction is a crime of violence categorically; the district court relied on Pantle to apply the modified categorical approach.
- On appeal, the Eleventh Circuit held that false imprisonment is a crime of violence under the residual clause using a risk-analysis comparison to burglary, and affirmed the career-offender sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Georgia false imprisonment is a crime of violence under § 4B1.2(a)(2)'s residual clause | Chitwood: not a residual-clause crime of violence under Georgia law. | Chitwood: the offense falls outside the residual clause under Begay/Sykes analysis. | Yes; Georgia false imprisonment is a crime of violence under the residual clause. |
| Whether the district court erred by applying the modified categorical approach based on Pantle | Pantle relies on Shepard documents; no such documents were consulted. | Government: district court properly applied Pantle to determine basis for conviction. | The error did not require vacating the sentence; the offense is categorically a crime of violence. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pantle v. United States, 637 F.3d 1172 (11th Cir. 2011) (modified categorical approach under Shepard framework)
- Sykes v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2267 (2011) (consolidated view on residual clause applicability; retreat from Begay's exact test)
- Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (U.S. 2008) (limit on residual clause to 'purposeful, violent, and aggressive' crimes in certain contexts)
- James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (U.S. 2007) (categorical approach focusing on elements and generic risk)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1990) (explains risk of confrontation as a rationale for violent crimes)
- Harris v. United States, 608 F.3d 1222 (11th Cir. 2010) (synthesis of James/Begay for 4B1.2 residual-clause analysis)
- Salemi v. United States, 26 F.3d 1084 (11th Cir. 1994) (kidnapping-as-violent-felony precedent for violence under 4B1.2)