871 F.3d 841
8th Cir.2017Background
- Defendant Eddie Byas convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) for being a felon in possession of a firearm; district court applied the ACCA 15-year mandatory minimum based on three prior convictions.
- One challenged predicate was a 2005 Illinois burglary conviction: charged as "residential burglary," plea to the lesser included offense labeled simply "burglary."
- Illinois burglary statute, 720 Ill. Comp. Stat. 5/19-1(a), lists multiple locations (building, housetrailer, watercraft, aircraft, motor vehicle, railroad car, etc.) where burglary may occur.
- Under Taylor v. United States, a state burglary conviction is an ACCA predicate only if it is no broader than generic burglary: unlawful entry or remaining in a building/structure with intent to commit a crime.
- The central question: whether the Illinois statute’s enumerated locations are elements (divisible statute permitting the modified categorical approach) or mere means (making the statute overly broad), and whether Illinois’s definition of "building" is coextensive with Taylor’s generic meaning.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Illinois burglary conviction qualifies as ACCA burglary predicate | Byas: Illinois statute is overbroad because it reaches non-buildings (vehicles, trailers), so conviction cannot serve as ACCA predicate | Government: statute either is divisible so the government can show conviction was for a generic "building" burglary, or Illinois "building" aligns with generic definition | Held: Vacated sentence. Illinois definition of "building" is broader than Taylor; statute not a categorical match and not divisible into a generic-building offense for ACCA purposes |
| Whether the statute’s location list are elements (divisible) or means (indivisible) | Byas: even if divisible, Illinois courts treat semitrailers/vehicles as "building," so divisible approach still fails | Government: (implicit) some alternatives could match generic burglary, enabling modified categorical approach | Held: Even treating list as elements, Illinois case law expands "building" to include semitrailers, making the statute broader than generic burglary |
| Whether Illinois case law binds the court’s interpretation of "building" | Byas: Illinois authority controls state-law meaning of "building" | Government: relied on earlier assumptions/cases treating Illinois burglary as aligning with Taylor | Held: Court follows Illinois appellate decisions (e.g., Denton, Ruiz) showing semitrailers can be "buildings," so Taylor’s narrower definition is not satisfied |
| Remedy: appropriate disposition | Byas: sentence under ACCA is improper and must be vacated | Government: (implicit) sentence should stand if predicate valid | Held: Vacate ACCA sentence and remand for resentencing without treating that Illinois burglary conviction as an ACCA predicate |
Key Cases Cited
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (defines generic burglary for ACCA purposes)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (distinguishes elements from means; governs divisible-statute analysis)
- Johnson v. Fankell, 520 U.S. 911 (1997) (state court’s interpretation of its own law controls federal treatment of state convictions)
- United States v. Sims, 854 F.3d 1037 (8th Cir. 2017) (vehicles, including trailer homes, do not fit Taylor’s generic burglary)
- United States v. Phillips, 853 F.3d 432 (8th Cir. 2017) (statute covering trailers/vehicles is overbroad compared to generic burglary)
- United States v. Tucker, 740 F.3d 1177 (8th Cir. 2014) (if statute is divisible and one alternative matches, apply modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Maxwell, 363 F.3d 815 (8th Cir. 2004) (earlier assumption that Illinois burglary contained generic elements not dispositive here)
- United States v. Haney, 840 F.3d 472 (7th Cir. 2016) (holding the Illinois-type enumerated list are means rather than elements)