United States v. Kearney
675 F.3d 571
6th Cir.2012Background
- Kearney pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm; the plea contemplated a Guideline range that could be increased under ACCA.
- After new counsel, the district court set aside the plea agreement but preserved Kearney’s right to argue about ACCA enhancement and his right to appeal.
- At a March 29, 2010 sentencing, Kearney pleaded guilty to the narcotics offense and contended two Michigan domestic-violence convictions were not ACCA predicate violent felonies.
- The district court rejected this, applied ACCA enhancement, and imposed 180 months on the firearms offense, concurrent with a one-day narcotics sentence.
- PSR relied on four prior Michigan convictions, including two domestic-violence recidivism enhancements, to support ACCA.
- The Sixth Circuit affirmed, applying a two-step analysis (categorical then modified categorical) and holding that the domestic-violence convictions qualify as predicate violent felonies under ACCA.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether state recidivism-enhanced convictions can qualify as ACCA predicates | Kearney contends recidivism-enhanced state offenses should not count unless the base offense itself meets ACCA | The government argues that underlying enhancements may be considered to determine ACCA predicate status | Yes; underlying enhancements may be considered to qualify as predicates |
| Whether Michigan domestic-violence recidivism convictions satisfy ACCA's violent felony | DV convictions were misdemeanors with only up to 93 days, not violent felonies under ACCA | State enhancements produced sentences exceeding one year, making them predicate offenses | They qualify as ACCA predicate violent felonies |
| Whether the modified categorical approach applies to ACCA predicates derived from enhanced offenses | Johnson disfavors treating common-law or misdemeanor-derived enhancements as ACCA predicates | Rodriquez and related principles support considering enhancements to determine predicate status | Modified categorical approach applies; underlying enhancements may count |
| Whether Rodriguez, Begay, and Sykes require different treatment for enhanced offenses than non-enhanced offenses | Rodriquez suggests considering enhancements; Johnson cautions against overreliance on common-law notions | Consistency with other sentencing provisions supports considering enhancements | Maintain consistency with Rodriguez; treat enhanced offenses as potentially qualifying |
Key Cases Cited
- Rodríguez v. United States, 553 U.S. 377 (Supreme Court, 2008) (holds that recidivism-enhanced prior convictions may count toward ACCA predicates)
- Johnson v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 1265 (Supreme Court, 2010) (warns against importing common-law misdemeanor concepts into ACCA's violent felony definition)
- Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (Supreme Court, 2008) (requires rough similarity to enumerated offenses for ACCA's residual clause)
- Sykes v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2267 (Supreme Court, 2011) (clarifies risk-based approach to ACCA's violent felony definition)
- Chambers v. United States, 555 U.S. 122 (Supreme Court, 2009) (discusses interpretation of ACCA's text alongside risk and mens rea considerations)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (Supreme Court, 1990) (establishes the general categorical approach for ACCA analysis)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (Supreme Court, 2005) (permits use of police reports and other documents to apply the modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Wynn, 579 F.3d 567 (6th Cir. 2009) (notes on improper reliance on PSR for ACCA enhancement considerations)
- United States v. Gibbs, 626 F.3d 344 (6th Cir. 2010) (cites Shepard framework for establishing the nature of prior convictions)
- United States v. Benton, 639 F.3d 723 (6th Cir. 2011) (de novo review of whether an offense qualifies as a violent felony under ACCA)