United States v. Rich
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 2823
| 10th Cir. | 2013Background
- Rich pled guilty to felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- He qualified for ACCA enhancement due to three predicate offenses, including a 1991 juvenile robbery with a dangerous weapon adjudication.
- A state court later dismissed Rich’s juvenile case, which Rich argued negated the adjudication for ACCA purposes.
- District court rejected the arguments, applying ACCA and imposing a 180-month mandatory minimum.
- Rich challenged the use of the juvenile adjudication and alleged due process violations, but the district court and on‑appeal court affirmed.
- The court noted the ACCA defines a conviction to include juvenile delinquency findings and rejected both arguments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a dismissed juvenile adjudication remains a predicate under ACCA | Rich argues dismissal nullifies the adjudication for ACCA purposes | Rich's adjudication remains a predicate despite dismissal; dismissal terminates jurisdiction, not nullity | No; dismissal does not negate the adjudication for ACCA purposes |
| Whether using older juvenile adjudications violates substantive due process | Using old juvenile adjudications to enhance is irrational and shocks conscience | ACCA has no time limit on qualifying predicates; due process allows it | Does not violate substantive due process; ACCA lacks a constitutional defect in this respect |
| Whether ACCA’s lack of age limits on predicate convictions is constitutionally permissible | Lack of temporal limits is irrational given other rules limit old convictions | Congress may treat aging convictions differently; rational policy justification exists | Constitutional; ACCA's approach is rational and not shockingly arbitrary |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Lujan, 9 F.3d 890 (10th Cir. 1993) (no time-limit on age of convictions for ACCA purposes)
- United States v. Preston, 910 F.2d 81 (3d Cir. 1990) (three-strikes-like reasoning; no constitutional defect in relying on older convictions)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (U.S. Supreme Court 2010) (immaturity concerns; juvenile sentencing considerations discussed)
- Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (U.S. Supreme Court 2008) (limits on classification of violent offenses for ACCA purposes)
- United States v. Tighe, 266 F.3d 1187 (9th Cir. 2001) (Apprendi concerns regarding nonjury juvenile adjudications as predicate)