United States v. Donald Walker
934 F.3d 375
4th Cir.2019Background
- Defendant Donald Eugene Walker pled guilty to federal kidnapping (18 U.S.C. § 1201(a)) and to brandishing a firearm in relation to a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)); district court sentenced him to 324 months + 84 months.
- Walker challenged his § 924(c) conviction on appeal, arguing the statute’s residual clause (§ 924(c)(3)(B)) is unconstitutionally vague after Johnson and related Supreme Court decisions.
- The Fourth Circuit stayed the case pending Supreme Court decisions addressing similar residual clauses (Dimaya, Davis) and then decided Simms (en banc) holding § 924(c)(3)(B) void for vagueness; Supreme Court later held similarly in Davis.
- The court reviewed Walker’s claim for plain error because it was raised for the first time on appeal.
- The panel examined both the residual clause (§ 924(c)(3)(B)) and the force clause (§ 924(c)(3)(A)) to determine whether kidnapping categorically qualifies as a "crime of violence."
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 924(c)(3)(B) (residual clause) is constitutional | Walker: residual clause is void for vagueness after Johnson/Dimaya/Davis | Government: residual clause should be treated differently here | Court: Residual clause is unconstitutionally vague; plain error to rely on it |
| Whether kidnapping under 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a) is a "crime of violence" under § 924(c)(3)(A) (force clause) | Walker: Kidnapping can be committed by nonphysical means (inveiglement); thus not necessarily involving physical force | Government: The "holding" element requires unlawful restraint, which implies force | Court: Both elements of § 1201(a) can be satisfied without physical force; kidnapping is not categorically a crime of violence under the force clause |
| Remedy for erroneous § 924(c) conviction | Walker: Vacatur and resentencing because additional § 924(c) sentence cannot stand | Government: (argued to uphold conviction) | Court: Vacated § 924(c) conviction and remanded for entry of judgment of acquittal on that count and resentencing |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (2015) (invalidated similar residual clause on vagueness grounds)
- Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018) (held identical language in § 16(b) void for vagueness)
- United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019) (Supreme Court held § 924(c)(3)(B) unconstitutionally vague)
- United States v. Simms, 914 F.3d 229 (4th Cir. en banc 2019) (Fourth Circuit held § 924(c)(3)(B) void for vagueness)
- United States v. Marcus, 560 U.S. 258 (2010) (plain-error review framework)
- Chatwin v. United States, 326 U.S. 455 (1946) (holding element "to hold" can be satisfied by unlawful restraint; court’s discussion that proof of willful intent by force, fear, or deception is required)
- United States v. Hughes, 716 F.2d 234 (4th Cir. 1983) (kidnapping elements met without physical force when defendant induced entry by misrepresentation)
- United States v. Fuertes, 805 F.3d 485 (4th Cir. 2015) (unenforceable § 924(c) conviction prejudices defendant and warrants vacatur)