925 F.3d 881
6th Cir.2019Background
- In 2016 Myers, a felon, entered a home with a gun and demanded drugs; he pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- The PSR identified three prior convictions triggering the ACCA: one aggravated assault and two Tennessee convictions for "initiation of a process intended to result in the manufacture of methamphetamine" (Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-435).
- The initiation convictions each carried a statutory maximum of 10+ years; the PSR recommended the ACCA mandatory minimum of 15 years (180 months).
- Myers objected at sentencing, arguing the Tennessee initiation offense is not a "serious drug offense" under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii), so the ACCA enhancement should not apply.
- The district court found the initiation offenses qualify as serious drug offenses because initiating a manufacturing process involves manufacturing, sentenced Myers to 180 months, and this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Myers) | Defendant's Argument (Government) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Tennessee's initiation-of-methamphetamine-manufacture statute is a "serious drug offense" under the ACCA | The initiation offense can be convicted without possessing or producing a controlled substance; it criminalizes steps too remote from "manufacturing" to satisfy ACCA’s "involving manufacturing" requirement. | The initiation statute criminalizes knowing steps to begin methamphetamine production (extraction, modification, heating/combining) and thus sufficiently "involves" manufacturing to qualify under ACCA. | Court affirmed: the initiation offense involves manufacture and therefore qualifies as a serious drug offense under § 924(e)(2)(A)(ii). |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Eason, 919 F.3d 385 (6th Cir. 2019) (concluded Tennessee promoting-methamphetamine statute “involves” manufacture for ACCA purposes)
- Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) (adopting the categorical approach for determining ACCA predicate offenses)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (assessment depends on statutory elements, not state labels)
- United States v. Stafford, 721 F.3d 380 (6th Cir. 2013) (de novo review of whether a prior conviction is an ACCA predicate)