United States v. Smith
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14299
| 10th Cir. | 2011Background
- Smith pled guilty in the Western District of Oklahoma to one count of felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- The PSIR recommended ACCA enhancement based on three prior violent felonies; Smith objected to the calculation.
- Smith specifically challenged his Oklahoma conviction for assault and battery on an Office of Juvenile Affairs employee as not qualifying as a violent felony under the ACCA.
- The district court overruled the objection and sentenced Smith to 200 months in prison and 3 years of supervised release.
- Oklahoma § 650.2(D) punishes assault or battery on an Office of Juvenile Affairs employee; assault and battery definitions involve willful/knowing conduct and force or violence.
- The court addressed whether the Oklahoma offense falls under the ACCA via the categorical and residual (modified) approaches and concluded it qualifies under the residual clause.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Oklahoma offense qualifies as a violent felony under the ACCA. | Smith contends the offense lacks the use of violent force element. | Smith argues the offense falls outside ACCA § 924(e)(2)(B)(i) and relies on the modified approach only if needed. | Qualifies under the ACCA residual clause § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). |
| Whether the residual clause test should apply to this offense given its conduct. | The offense does not resemble listed offenses in kind or degree of risk. | The offense involves a situation with serious risk of injury when a state employee is in custody. | The residual clause applies; the offense presents a serious potential risk of physical injury. |
Key Cases Cited
- Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (2008) (limits ACCA predicates to purposeful, violent, and aggressive conduct in some contexts; informs risk-based approach)
- Williams v. United States, 559 F.3d 1143 (10th Cir. 2009) (guides risk comparison to enumerated offenses under ACCA residual clause)
- Sykes v. United States, 131 S. Ct. 2267 (2011) (clarifies risk-based analysis for residual clause; rejects overreading Begay)
- West v. United States, 550 F.3d 952 (10th Cir. 2008) (explains categorical vs. modified categorical approach)
- Chambers v. United States, 555 U.S. 122 (2009) (residual clause interpretation and scope guidance)
- James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (2007) (establishes that ACCA offenses create significant risks of injury)
- Steele v. State, 778 P.2d 929 (Okla. Crim. App. 1989) (defines 'force or violence' as minimal touching in battery under Oklahoma law)