United States v. Marcel Aparicio-Soria
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 13660
| 4th Cir. | 2013Background
- Aparicio-Soria pleaded guilty in April 2012 in the District of Maryland to illegally reentering after removal.
- The district court applied the crime-of-violence enhancement under § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) based on a Maryland resisting-arrest conviction.
- Maryland resisting arrest (Md. Code, Crim. Law § 9-408(b)(1)) includes a force element, with Rich v. State clarifying that force or threat of force is required.
- The court initially used the categorical approach but then evaluated the underlying charging document under a modified approach, concluding the conduct supported the enhancement.
- The district court recalculated the Guidelines range to 57–71 months and, after a downward variance, sentenced Aparicio-Soria to 36 months.
- The Fourth Circuit majority affirms, adopting a categorical analysis that Maryland resisting arrest satisfies the force clause; the concurrence dissents on whether the force element must be violent force.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court properly applied the modified categorical approach | Aparicio-Soria | United States | Modified approach not required; use categorical approach |
| Whether Maryland resisting arrest has a force element meeting the force clause | Aparicio-Soria | United States | Maryland resisting arrest has violent force element under Johnson standard |
| Whether the charging document evidence suffices to show the necessary force | Aparicio-Soria | United States | Evidence demonstrates violent force sufficient for the force clause |
Key Cases Cited
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (U.S. 2013) (indivisible statute analysis; proper use of elements-based review)
- Johnson v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 1265 (U.S. 2010) (physical force means violent force; limits to minimal contact)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1990) (categorical approach for determining predicate offenses)
- United States v. Wardrick, 350 F.3d 446 (4th Cir. 2003) (residual-clause analysis for ACCA/related contexts)
- Jenkins v. United States, 631 F.3d 680 (4th Cir. 2011) (application to career-offender contexts; element-based inquiry)
- Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 1678 (U.S. 2013) (elements-based interpretation in category analyses)
- Gomez v. United States, 690 F.3d 194 (4th Cir. 2012) (recites guiding framework for categorical vs modified approaches)
- Rangel-Castaneda, 709 F.3d 373 (4th Cir. 2013) (statutory-interpretation debates in § 2L1.2 context)