United States v. Gregory Brown
765 F.3d 185
| 3rd Cir. | 2014Background
- Brown challenged a career offender designation after a 2010 guilty plea for mailing a threatening communication under 18 U.S.C. § 876(c).
- PSR urged career offender based on four priors: 1986 aggravated assault; 2004 terroristic threats; 2005 terroristic threats; 2005 retaliation against a judicial officer (two 2005 counts from same conduct).
- District court applied Mahone’s approach to treat § 2706(a)(1) as potentially a crime of violence and determined 2004/2005 counts qualified; Descamps later limited this reasoning.
- Brown argued Descamps overruled Mahone; the court acknowledged Descamps abrogates the Mahone-side analysis of facts, not the legal framework entirely.
- Court applied Descamps’s framework, concluded § 2706(a)(1) is overbroad/indivisible for predicate purposes, vacated Brown’s sentence, and remanded for resentencing.
- Procedural posture: appellate review of legality of career offender enhancement; outcome required remand to re-sentence without the enhancement.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 2706(a)(1) can be a crime of violence. | Brown asserts § 2706(a)(1) is overbroad/indivisible with no always-violent element. | Brown contends the district court can rely on the facts underlying the conviction under Mahone. | No; Descamps renders § 2706(a)(1) not categorically a crime of violence. |
| Whether Descamps abrogates Mahone’s approach. | Descamps supersedes Mahone’s fact-based predicate analysis. | Government argues Blair preserves some use of modified categorical reasoning. | Descamps governs; Mahone’s approach is limited or overruled. |
| Whether the modified categorical approach applies to § 2706(a). | District court could examine extra-statutory documents to identify the specific subsection. | No version of § 2706(a) always satisfies the crime-of-violence element; modified approach not permitted. | Modified categorical approach cannot be applied; § 2706(a) cannot yield a predicate offense. |
| Result of career offender enhancement given Descamps. | Predicate offenses existed via 1986/2004 convictions. | Thus the enhancement would apply. | Career offender enhancement not available; sentence vacated and remanded for resentencing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (Supreme Court 2013) (overruled “modified factual” approach; limited use of facts outside elements)
- United States v. Mahone, 662 F.3d 651 (3d Cir. 2011) (held some § 2706(a)(1) convictions may be predicate offenses under Mahone’s framework)
- United States v. Blair, 734 F.3d 218 (3d Cir. 2013) (discussed divisibility and modified categorical approach applicability)
- United States v. Cabrera-Umanzor, 728 F.3d 347 (4th Cir. 2013) (divisibility analysis; not all divisible statutes permit modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Mitchell, 743 F.3d 1054 (6th Cir. 2014) (cites Descamps’ limits on applying modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Marrero, 743 F.3d 389 (3d Cir. 2014) (analysis of violent felony definitions and related applicability)
- Ortiz-Gomez v. United States, 562 F.3d 683 (5th Cir. 2009) (definition of crime of violence and its elements (cited for elements-based approach))