United States v. Jerrod Mack
855 F.3d 581
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Jerrod Mack pleaded guilty to possession of a stolen firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(j)); district court applied U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2) and sentenced him to 70 months (low end of Guidelines range).
- § 2K2.1(a)(2) prescribes a base offense level of 24 where the defendant has at least two prior felony convictions for a "crime of violence." The court relied on two North Carolina convictions: (1) attempted first-degree burglary and conspiracy to commit first-degree burglary (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-51), and (2) felony breaking and entering (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 14-54).
- U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a) defined "crime of violence" to include (1) offenses with an element of force, or (2) enumerated offenses (e.g., burglary of a dwelling) or otherwise conduct that "presents a serious potential risk of physical injury" (the residual clause). Application Note 1 stated that aiding/abetting, conspiracy, and attempt "include" as crimes of violence.
- Mack argued on appeal that after Johnson v. United States (holding the ACCA residual clause void for vagueness), the Guidelines’ residual clause was likewise void, so the Commentary could not validly treat his inchoate burglary convictions as predicate crimes.
- After briefing, the Supreme Court decided Beckles v. United States, holding the advisory Sentencing Guidelines are not subject to vagueness challenges and therefore § 4B1.2(a)’s residual clause is not void; the Fourth Circuit applied Beckles, treated the Commentary as authoritative (Stinson), and held Mack’s inchoate first‑degree burglary conviction categorically matches burglary of a dwelling.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Mack’s NC convictions for attempt and conspiracy to commit first‑degree burglary qualify as crimes of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a) for purposes of § 2K2.1(a)(2) | Mack: Johnson invalidates the Guidelines’ residual clause, so Commentary cannot convert inchoate burglary convictions into an enumerated crime of violence | Government: Beckles preserves the Guidelines’ residual clause and Commentary; inchoate offenses fall within § 4B1.2(a) as interpreted | Court: Beckles forecloses vagueness challenge; under § 4B1.2(a) and Application Note 1 (Stinson), NC attempt/conspiracy to first‑degree burglary categorically qualifies as a crime of violence; sentence affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (held ACCA residual clause void for vagueness)
- Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (held advisory Sentencing Guidelines not subject to vagueness challenges)
- Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (Sentencing Guidelines commentary is authoritative unless inconsistent with the guideline)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (established categorical approach and generic burglary definition)
- United States v. Peterson, 629 F.3d 432 (describing two‑step categorical approach in the Fourth Circuit)
- United States v. Bonilla, 687 F.3d 188 (limiting "building or other structure" to dwellings where guideline requires a dwelling)