United States v. Michael St. Hubert
883 F.3d 1319
11th Cir.2018Background
- Michael St. Hubert pled guilty to two counts under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) for using/brandishing a firearm during (1) a Hobbs Act robbery (AutoZone, Jan. 21, 2015) and (2) an attempted Hobbs Act robbery (AutoZone, Jan. 27, 2015); factual admissions at plea included brandishing/holding a gun and related identifications and searches.
- The indictment charged the § 924(c) counts as predicated on the Hobbs Act robbery and attempted robbery (18 U.S.C. § 1951).
- St. Hubert moved pre-plea to dismiss the § 924(c) counts, arguing Hobbs Act robbery is not a “crime of violence” under either § 924(c)(3)(A) (use-of-force clause) or § 924(c)(3)(B) (residual/risk-of-force clause) and that § 924(c)(3)(B) is void for vagueness under Johnson.
- The district court denied the motion; St. Hubert pled guilty to the two § 924(c) counts and was sentenced to 84 months (Count 8) and 300 months consecutively (Count 12), and appealed.
- On appeal the panel considered (a) whether St. Hubert waived his claims by pleading guilty and (b) the merits: whether Hobbs Act robbery and attempted robbery are crimes of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A) and/or (B).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (St. Hubert) | Defendant's Argument (Gov't) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a guilty plea waives a constitutional challenge to § 924(c)(3)(B)’s residual clause | Plea does not waive a claim that the statute of conviction is unconstitutional (void-for-vagueness under Johnson) | Guilty plea waived collateral/statutory challenges | Court: Guilty plea does not bar constitutional challenge to the statute of conviction (Class & Saac) — challenge considered and rejected on merits by precedent (Ovalles) |
| Whether a guilty plea waived statutory claim that Hobbs Act robbery is not a § 924(c)(3)(A) crime of violence (i.e., plea to a non‑offense / jurisdictional) | The indictment alleged conduct that, as a matter of law, is not a § 924(c)(3)(A) crime; such a “non‑offense” challenge is jurisdictional and not waivable | The defect is non‑jurisdictional (indictment sufficient under § 3231) and thus waived by plea | Court: The claim is jurisdictional under Eleventh Circuit precedent (Meacham/Peter); not waived; merits considered |
| Whether Hobbs Act robbery qualifies under § 924(c)(3)(B) (residual clause) after Johnson | § 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague post‑Johnson; cannot sustain § 924(c) convictions | § 924(c)(3)(B) differs materially from ACCA residual clause and survives Johnson | Court: § 924(c)(3)(B) is constitutional (Ovalles); Hobbs Act robbery qualifies under (B); affirmed |
| Whether Hobbs Act robbery and attempted Hobbs Act robbery qualify under § 924(c)(3)(A) (use‑of‑force clause) | Hobbs Act’s “fear of injury, immediate or future” language can encompass non‑physical intimidation and thus does not categorically require the use/threat of physical force | Hobbs Act robbery necessarily involves actual/threatened physical force or attempted use of force; attempt likewise satisfies the attempted‑use language in § 924(c)(3)(A) | Court: Hobbs Act robbery and attempted Hobbs Act robbery are crimes of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A) (Saint Fleur, Colon, and categorical/attempt analysis); affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Class v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 798 (2018) (a voluntary guilty plea does not by itself waive a direct appeal claim that the statute of conviction is unconstitutional)
- United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 (2002) (defects in an indictment generally do not deprive the court of jurisdiction; limited to omitted elements)
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (ACCA residual clause is unconstitutionally vague)
- Ovalles v. United States, 861 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2017) (holding § 924(c)(3)(B) is not invalidated by Johnson)
- In re Saint Fleur, 824 F.3d 1337 (11th Cir. 2016) (Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A))
- In re Colon, 826 F.3d 1301 (11th Cir. 2016) (aiding and abetting Hobbs Act robbery qualifies under § 924(c)(3)(A))
- United States v. Robinson, 844 F.3d 137 (3d Cir. 2016) (Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence; endorses a modified categorical approach for § 924(c) companion offenses)
- United States v. Peter, 310 F.3d 709 (11th Cir. 2002) (an indictment that affirmatively alleges only conduct outside the statute of conviction presents a jurisdictional defect)