494 F. App'x 404
4th Cir.2012Background
- Battle pleaded guilty to felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- District court sentenced Battle to 180 months under ACCA, relying on three qualifying predicates among his prior convictions.
- Court treated two Maryland drug offenses as serious drug offenses for ACCA; Battle does not challenge this.
- District court held Battle’s 1991 Maryland assault with intent to murder conviction was a violent felony under ACCA § 924(e)(2)(B)(i) and the residual clause § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii).
- Battle argues the Maryland conviction is not categorically a violent felony because it may not require violent force, and residual clause vagueness is displayed.
- Court affirms, holding assault with intent to murder is a violent felony under the residual clause, and the residual clause is not unconstitutionally vague.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether assault with intent to murder is a violent felony under §924(e)(2)(B)(ii). | Battle contends it may not require violent force. | Battle’s Maryland conviction involves conduct with serious risk of injury; the district court held it falls under §924(e)(2)(B)(ii). | Yes; assault with intent to murder fits the residual clause. |
| Whether §924(e)(2)(B)(ii) is unconstitutionally vague. | Residual clause is vague and fatally flawed. | Supreme Court has upheld vagueness challenges in other contexts; not unconstitutionally vague here. | Not unconstitutionally vague; residual clause sustained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Taylor v. United States, 495 F.2d 575 (1990) ( definitional framework for violent felonies under ACCA)
- James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (2007) (residual clause interpreted as intelligible)
- Sykes v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2267 (2011) (residual clause provides guidance, not void for vagueness)
- United States v. Harcum, 587 F.3d 219 (2009) (Maryland assault distinctions; some forms qualify, some do not)
- United States v. Alston, 611 F.3d 219 (2010) (Maryland assault convictions vary in violent felonious character)
- United States v. Coleman, 158 F.3d 199 (1998) (assault offenses can encompass non-violent forms)
- United States v. Jarmon, 596 F.3d 228 (2010) (guidance on ACCA’s violent felony predicates)
- United States v. Hudson, 673 F.3d 263 (2012) (reaffirmation that residual clause is intelligible)