United States v. Lee Adams
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 11698
| 8th Cir. | 2013Background
- Adams pleaded guilty to felon-in-possession charges in two districts; ACCA applicability to be determined by district court.
- Two California assault convictions under Penal Code §245(a)(1) could be felonies or misdemeanors depending on sentencing (wobblers).
- Adams admitted each §245 conviction carried over one year imprisonment, but argued they were misdemeanors due to probation/suspended imposition.
- The district court classified all three prior California convictions as felonies under ACCA, resulting in an armed career criminal sentence.
- Adams appealed, challenging the classification of the two §245 offenses as felonies and asserting lenity should apply; court affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the two §245(a)(1) wobbler convictions are felonies for ACCA purposes | Adams contends they were misdemeanors under California law | State classification favored felony designation due to probation/suspension | Felonies for ACCA purposes; wobbler status did not render nonfelony given no judgment or declaration of misdemeanor. |
| Whether California §§ 17(b)(1)/(3) affect felony status for ACCA | Robinson-based theory makes them misdemeanors if judgment declared | Robinson does not apply; probation with suspended sentence not a judgment | §17(b) did not apply; convictions remained felonies for ACCA. |
| Whether lenity should resolve ambiguity in Adams’s favor | Lenity should apply due to statutory ambiguity | No grievous ambiguity; lenity not warranted | Rule of lenity not invoked; no grievous ambiguity. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Robinson, 967 F.2d 287 (9th Cir. 1992) (felony status preserved despite probation/suspension; no judgment.)
- United States v. Viezcas-Soto, 562 F.3d 903 (8th Cir. 2009) (distinguishes records unclear on how sentence was imposed; not controlling here.)
- United States v. Bridgeforth, 441 F.3d 864 (9th Cir. 2006) (probation termination and county jail sentence can affect misdemeanor status; distinguishable.)
- Muscarello v. United States, 524 U.S. 125 (1998) (clarifies ambiguity thresholds for the rule of lenity.)
- United States v. Boaz, 558 F.3d 800 (8th Cir. 2009) (guidelines/violent felony determinations; de novo review standard.)