United States v. Clay
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 25000
| 4th Cir. | 2010Background
- Clay pled guilty to one count of felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g).
- District court sentenced him to 60 months, calculating base offense level using Georgia felony escape as a crime of violence under USSG § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A).
- PSR identified the Georgia felony escape (Ga.Code § 16-10-52(a)) as the predicate crime of violence and reduced for acceptance of responsibility, yielding a range of 51–63 months.
- Clay objected, arguing the Georgia escape offense does not qualify as a crime of violence under § 4B1.2(a) and thus not a base level of 20.
- The district court overruled the objections and sentenced Clay to 60 months; Clay timely appealed, with supplemental briefing after Bethea (4th Cir. 2010).
- The Fourth Circuit vacates and remands, holding the district court erred in counting the Georgia escape as a crime of violence under USSG § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Georgia felony escape qualify as a crime of violence | Clay: escape statute not a crime of violence under 4B1.2(a) (Otherwise Clause). | United States: the statute could be a crime of violence via modified categorical approach. | No; walk-away escape from an unsecured facility does not fit § 4B1.2(a)'s Otherwise Clause. |
| Do the charging documents show break-out or walk-away | Clay: documents allow walk-away, non-violent conduct. | United States: documents show break-out from secured facility. | Documents do not conclusively show break-out; could be walk-away, so not a qualifying crime of violence. |
| Impact on base offense level and remand scope | If not a crime of violence, base level should not be 20; remand for proper calculation. | N/A or not applicable; focus on proper categorization. | Vacated and remanded to reassess base level under correct interpretation and comply with reasons for sentence. |
| Lawful sporting purposes reduction under 2K2.1(b)(2) | Clay may still qualify for the reduction if possessed solely for lawful sporting purposes. | Government contends lack of license and non-sporting intent negate the reduction. | Remand instructed to consider whether the reduction applies on the corrected base level. |
Key Cases Cited
- Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (Supreme Court, 2008) (limits ACCA Otherwise Clause to similarly situated crimes)
- Jarmon, 596 F.3d 228 (4th Cir. 2010) (defines de novo review for crime of violence under 4B1.2(a))
- Rivers, 595 F.3d 558 (4th Cir. 2010) (ACCA/4B1.2 analysis on otherwise clause nuances)
- Seay, 553 F.3d 732 (4th Cir. 2009) (modified categorical approach allowed to look at charging documents)
- Chambers v. United States, 555 U.S. 122 (Supreme Court, 2009) (failure to report to penal institution not a crime of violence)
- Bethea, 603 F.3d 254 (4th Cir. 2010) (addressed modified categorical approach and 'necessarily show' requirement)
- Diaz-Ibarra, 522 F.3d 343 (4th Cir. 2008) (posture of applying modified categorical approach)
- Sura, 511 F.3d 654 (7th Cir. 2007) (guidance on sporting-purpose reductions for felons in possession cases)
- Carter, 564 F.3d 325 (4th Cir. 2009) (sentence-explanation requirements for open-court reasons)