United States v. Shannon
631 F.3d 1187
| 11th Cir. | 2011Background
- Roye pleaded guilty to importing 500+ grams of cocaine and failing to appear for arraignment.
- District court sentenced Roye to 188 months as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1.
- Roye’s prior Florida conviction alleged trafficking in cocaine under Fla. Stat. § 893.135(1)(b)1.
- The Florida statute disjunctively covers selling, purchasing, or possessing 28+ grams of cocaine.
- The district court could not determine which act the prior conviction involved, so the court assumed purchase for purposes of § 4B1.2(b).
- Court vacated and remanded for proper factual and legal analysis.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Roye’s Florida conviction qualifies as a controlled substance offense | Roye argues purchase with intent to distribute does not fit § 4B1.2(b) | Roye contends the conviction (assumed purchase) is not a controlled substance offense | No; purchase with intent to distribute is not within § 4B1.2(b) and the conviction does not qualify |
| Whether a modified categorical approach is required | Government seeks to apply standard approach | Because statute is divisible, modified categorical approach is needed | Yes; apply modified categorical approach to identify the actual prong of the statute |
| Whether Shepard documents were sufficient to resolve the ambiguity | Information and plea agree. resolve the basis for conviction | Plea colloquy and transcript not provided | Insufficient Shepard documents; remand for proper record |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. James, 430 F.3d 1150 (11th Cir. 2005) (Florida three-tiered drug scheme; trafficking by possession vs. purchase distinctions)
- United States v. Breitweiser, 357 F.3d 1249 (11th Cir. 2004) (modified categorical approach permitted in divisible statutes)
- United States v. Palomino Garcia, 606 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2010) (applies modified (categorical) approach to prior convictions)
- Salinas v. United States, 547 U.S. 188 (2006) (plain language governs whether prior conviction qualifies)
- United States v. Browne, 505 F.3d 1229 (11th Cir. 2007) (statutory interpretation requires not adding words to statute)
- Ras v. State, 610 So.2d 24 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992) (purchase does not necessarily imply possession under Florida law)
- Johnson v. United States, S. Ct. (2010) (bound by state-law elements; use modified approach when divisible)