United States v. Jacquere Doran, 978 F.3d 1337

In 2012 Doran was convicted under Cal. Penal Code § 422 (criminal threatening) and received a three-year prison term.
In 2015 he was convicted under Cal. Health & Safety Code § 11359 (possession of marijuana for sale) and received 32 months.
California reclassified § 11359 to a misdemeanor in 2016 and created a mechanism for retroactive redesignation; Doran sought and received redesignation (not vacation) in 2017.
In 2019 Doran pled guilty in federal court to being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)); the district court applied U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2) enhancements based on a prior "crime of violence" and a prior "controlled substance offense," and sentenced him to 96 months.
Doran appealed, arguing (1) § 422 is not a "crime of violence" under the Guidelines and (2) the state redesignation of his marijuana conviction precluded treating it as a prior felony controlled substance offense for guideline enhancement.

Issue	Doran's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether Cal. Penal Code § 422 is a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1/§4B1.2	§ 422 requires threatened injury but not necessarily threatened use of physical force, so it is not a "crime of violence."	§ 422's elements necessarily include threatened use of physical force capable of causing pain or injury, so it qualifies.	§ 422 qualifies as a "crime of violence" because its elements include threatened use of physical force.
Whether California's post‑conviction redesignation of § 11359 as a misdemeanor prevents its use as a prior felony "controlled substance offense" for Guidelines enhancement	Redesignation before the federal offense means the prior offense should not count as a felony for enhancement.	Federal inquiry is backward‑looking: whether the conviction was punishable as a felony at the time of conviction; redesignation does not negate enhancement.	Reclassification does not prevent treating the prior conviction as a felony for enhancement; courts look to punishability at time of conviction; guideline commentary permits departure but does not bar enhancement.

United States v. Villavicencio-Burruel, 608 F.3d 556 (9th Cir. 2010) (held Cal. Penal Code § 422 qualifies as a crime of violence under a Guidelines definition)
Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (2010) (defining "physical force" as force capable of causing physical pain or injury)
United States v. Castleman, 572 U.S. 157 (2014) (explaining the relationship between causing bodily injury and use of force)
United States v. Williams, 690 F.3d 1056 (8th Cir. 2012) (applying Johnson's definition of physical force to Guidelines)
United States v. Rice, 813 F.3d 704 (8th Cir. 2016) (de novo review of Guidelines interpretation and categorical approach)
United States v. Hirman, 613 F.3d 773 (8th Cir. 2010) (treating statutory and guideline definitions as interchangeable in this context)
United States v. Santillan, 944 F.3d 731 (8th Cir. 2019) (refusing to allow a later state reclassification to defeat federal enhancement for a prior felony marijuana conviction)
McNeill v. United States, 563 U.S. 816 (2011) (left open whether retroactive state reclassification can be considered in federal sentencing)