United States v. Devon McKenzie
696 F. App'x 417
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- In 2016 McKenzie robbed a customer at Dolphin Food Market, shot the customer in the leg, took jewelry and cash, and abandoned the firearm; the gun had traveled in interstate commerce.
- A federal indictment charged McKenzie with being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1). He pleaded guilty pursuant to a written plea agreement.
- The PSR applied the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) enhancement based on prior Florida convictions: armed robbery (2006), three counts of possession with intent to sell/manufacture/deliver cocaine (2009), and aggravated battery (2013).
- The ACCA classification raised his offense level and led to a guidelines range of 188–235 months; the court imposed a 180-month sentence after § 3553(a) consideration.
- McKenzie objected, arguing the three drug convictions were not qualifying serious drug offenses and that aggravated battery was not a violent felony; he acknowledged binding precedent on the drug-conviction point.
- The district court and this panel concluded the three Florida drug convictions qualified as serious drug offenses and that aggravated battery qualified as a violent felony; the ACCA enhancement was affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether three Florida convictions for possession with intent to sell/manufacture/deliver cocaine are ACCA "serious drug offenses" | Government: prior Florida convictions qualify as serious drug offenses under controlling Eleventh Circuit precedent | McKenzie: Florida statute lacks mens rea, so convictions should not qualify as ACCA predicates | Held: Qualify; binding Eleventh Circuit precedent (United States v. Smith) controls, rejecting mens rea challenge |
| Whether Florida aggravated battery qualifies as an ACCA "violent felony" | Government: aggravated battery meets violent-felony definition | McKenzie: conviction requires only de minimis force and thus is not a violent felony | Held: Aggravated battery qualifies as a violent felony; district court properly relied on that conviction as an alternative predicate |
| Whether ACCA enhancement was properly applied overall | Government: McKenzie has at least three qualifying prior convictions, so ACCA applies | McKenzie: challenges to one or more predicates undermine ACCA application | Held: ACCA applies because McKenzie has three qualifying predicate convictions (drug convictions suffice; aggravated battery also qualifies) |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Esprit, 841 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir.) (standard of review for whether a state conviction is an ACCA violent felony)
- United States v. White, 837 F.3d 1225 (11th Cir.) (standard of review for ACCA serious drug offenses)
- United States v. Smith, 775 F.3d 1262 (11th Cir.) (Florida § 893.13(1) possession with intent convictions qualify as ACCA serious drug offenses)
- United States v. Vega-Castillo, 540 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir.) (prior-precedent binding within the circuit)
- Turner v. Warden Coleman FCI (Medium), 709 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir.) (analysis of aggravated battery as an ACCA violent felony)
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (decision noted as abrogating some aspects of prior precedent on ACCA's residual clause)