United States v. Geoffrey Thomas Gattis
877 F.3d 150
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Gattis pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)).
- Police recovered a loaded 9mm Glock from Gattis during a traffic stop; the Glock matched a weapon reported stolen in a January 7 burglary. Searches of a residence associated with Gattis produced additional stolen property and several firearms and magazines.
- Presentence report applied an enhanced base offense level under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(3)/(a)(4) based on a prior North Carolina common-law robbery felony and other enhancements for number of firearms and possession in connection with another felony; total offense level recommended produced a higher Guidelines range.
- At sentencing the district court rejected the § 2K2.1(a)(3) treatment (no proof the weapon accepted large-capacity magazines) but held Gattis’s prior common-law robbery was a qualifying “crime of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a) (enumerated-robbery clause) and applied § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A). The court also applied enhancements for 3–7 firearms and possession in connection with another felony.
- The court sentenced Gattis to 70 months (low end of the adjusted Guidelines range). Gattis appealed, challenging (1) whether his North Carolina common-law robbery is a categorical match to the Guidelines’ generic “robbery,” and (2) sufficiency of evidence for the two additional enhancements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Gattis) | Defendant's Argument (Gov’t) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether North Carolina common-law robbery categorically qualifies as the Guidelines’ enumerated offense “robbery” (so as to be a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2)) | North Carolina robbery can be committed with only de minimis force; thus it is overbroad compared to generic robbery (and closer to larceny from the person) | North Carolina robbery requires taking by means of violence or fear (taking from person or presence by force/putting in fear), matching the generic definition endorsed by courts and LaFave | Affirmed: North Carolina common-law robbery categorically matches generic “robbery” and qualifies as a crime of violence for § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A) purposes |
| Whether the court erred in applying the 2-level enhancement for 3–7 firearms under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A) | The government failed to show Gattis had actual or constructive possession or knowledge of additional firearms recovered on Watson’s property; area was accessible to others | Evidence showed Gattis’s regular presence at Watson’s, connection to stolen items recovered there (matching items from burglaries tied to Gattis), and that the recovered firearms were part of same course of conduct | Affirmed: Preponderance of evidence supported finding the offense involved 3–7 firearms |
| Whether the court erred in applying the 4-level enhancement for possession of a firearm in connection with another felony under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) | Insufficient proof that any firearm facilitated another felony | The firearms had the potential to facilitate an ongoing felony conspiracy (burglaries/receipt of stolen goods); extensive stolen property from multiple burglaries linked to Gattis supported that finding | Affirmed: Evidence supported that the firearm had potential to facilitate other felony conduct, satisfying the enhancement’s "in connection with" standard |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Gardner, 823 F.3d 793 (4th Cir. 2016) (interpreting force-clause scope for North Carolina robbery under ACCA)
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (2010) (defining force clause requirement in ACCA context)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (establishing approach to determine generic, contemporary meaning of enumerated prior offenses)
- United States v. Yates, 866 F.3d 723 (6th Cir. 2017) (discussing when state robbery statutes are broader than generic robbery)
- State v. Robertson, 531 S.E.2d 490 (N.C. Ct. App. 2000) (North Carolina formulation of common-law robbery elements confirming taking by means of force or fear)