United States v. Sumrall
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 17377
| 1st Cir. | 2012Background
- Sumrall pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute over five grams of cocaine base.
- The government sought to apply career offender guidelines USSG §4B1.1(a) based on prior felonies.
- A 'crime of violence' under §4B1.2(a) includes elements like use of force or other serious risk factors; definition is applied categorically.
- Sumrall had a prior armed robbery conviction (crime of violence) and a Massachusetts ABPO conviction.
- District court enhanced Sumrall's sentencing range under the career offender guideline, imposing 188 months in prison.
- On appeal, the issue is whether the Massachusetts ABPO conviction counts as a crime of violence for the second predicate.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Massachusetts ABPO count as a crime of violence for career offender purposes? | Sumrall argued ABPO should not be a qualifying crime of violence. | Government argued ABPO is categorically a crime of violence under the career offender guideline. | Yes; ABPO qualifies as a crime of violence, affirming the sentence. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Dancy, 640 F.3d 455 (1st Cir. 2011) (ABPO categorized as violent felony under career offender in Dancy)
- United States v. Fernandez, 121 F.3d 777 (1st Cir. 1997) (ABPO categorized as crime of violence under career offender)
- United States v. Grupee, 682 F.3d 143 (1st Cir. 2012) (applies Dancy to the definition of crime of violence)
- United States v. Luna, 649 F.3d 91 (1st Cir. 2011) (affirmed categorization of ABPO-related offenses as violent crimes)
- United States v. Sykes, 131 S. Ct. 2267 (U.S. 2011) (guidelines definitions for violence applied categorically)
- James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (U.S. 2007) (categorical approach to violent offenses consistent across statutes)
- Custis v. United States, 511 U.S. 485 (U.S. 1994) (no right to collaterally attack prior convictions in federal sentencing)
- Commonwealth v. Eberhart, 965 N.E.2d 791 (Mass. 2012) (offensive battery analyzed as intentional touching in ABPO context)