United States v. Moore
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5094
| 5th Cir. | 2011Background
- Moore pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute five hundred grams of cocaine; district court sentenced him as a Career Offender under § 4B1.1(a) based on prior felony convictions.
- Moore was convicted under Louisiana law of aggravated battery with a motor vehicle (statutory § 14.34), and the weapon involved in the offense was a motor vehicle.
- The district court relied on Moore's Louisiana aggravated battery conviction to classify him as a Career Offender, resulting in a 327-month sentence.
- Moore timely appealed, and the Fifth Circuit remanded to address timeliness and record issues, ultimately affirming the sentence on remand.
- The key legal question is whether Louisiana aggravated battery with a motor vehicle qualifies as a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a), particularly under the residual clause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Louisiana aggravated battery with a motor vehicle qualify as a crime of violence under 4B1.2(a)? | Moore argues it does not fall under the residual clause. | The government contends it satisfies the residual clause as a crime involving a serious risk of physical injury. | Yes; it qualifies under the residual clause. |
| Is the instrumentality (motor vehicle) sufficient to satisfy the 'use of force' or residual-clause risk elements? | Moore asserts the instrumentality should not convert the offense to a crime of violence. | The government argues the instrumentality creates the necessary risk regardless of specific conduct. | Instrumentality suffices to establish a crime of violence under the residual clause. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Velasco, 465 F.3d 633 (5th Cir. 2006) (discusses 'use of force' element and related dependency for 4B1.2(a))
- Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (Sup. Ct. 2008) (defining residual-clause test for risk and similarity to enumerated offenses)
- James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (Sup. Ct. 2007) (categorical approach guidance for risk assessment under 4B1.2(a))
- Vargas-Duran, 356 F.3d 598 (5th Cir. 2004) (en banc; interpretation of 'use' and risk under 4B1.2(a))
- Calderon-Pena, 383 F.3d 254 (5th Cir. 2004) (en banc; application of residual-clause analysis)
- Insaulgarat, 378 F.3d 456 (5th Cir. 2004) (application of residual-clause framework in Fifth Circuit)