United States v. Taylor
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 26319
| 7th Cir. | 2010Background
- Taylor pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- District court enhanced his sentence based on Taylor's Indiana Class C felony battery conviction under Ind. Code § 35-42-2-1(a)(3) as a crime of violence under § 4B1.2(a).
- Taylor's battery conviction involved touching the victim in a rude, insolent, or angry manner with a deadly weapon (knife).
- His PSR recommended increasing base offense level from 14 to 20 due to the crime-of-violence designation.
- District court held the Indiana battery conviction qualified as a crime of violence, yielding an advisory range of 57–71 months and a 64-month sentence.
- Appellate review affirmed the district court, applying the modified categorical approach to a divisible statute and concluding the conduct meets the violence threshold.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Indiana battery statute §35-42-2-1(a)(3) qualifies as a crime of violence under §4B1.2(a). | Taylor argues it does not. | Government contends the statute is divisible and the deadly-weapon prong qualifies. | Yes; the conduct as charged falls within crime of violence. |
| Is the statute divisible, justifying a modified categorical approach. | Taylor questions divisibility. | Government assumes divisibility for determination. | Divisible; modified categorical approach applied. |
| Did the district court improperly rely on the facts underlying the conviction to determine violence? | Taylor contends improper consideration of underlying facts. | Government argues correctional approach supports outcome. | Harmless error; did not affect result. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Woods, 576 F.3d 400 (7th Cir. 2009) (guidelines analysis; use of categorical approach for violent-felony determinations)
- Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (S. Ct. 2008) (defined scope of crime-of-violence under ACCA; comparable reasoning)
- James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (S. Ct. 2007) (categorical approach; consider elements, not facts)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (S. Ct. 2005) (modified-categorical approach limitations; use of records to identify the precise offense)
- Treto-Martinez, 421 F.3d 1156 (10th Cir. 2005) (touching with deadly weapon can be crime of violence)
- Grajeda, 581 F.3d 1186 (9th Cir. 2009) (deadly-weapon touching qualifies as crime of violence)
- Dominguez, 479 F.3d 345 (5th Cir. 2007) (aggravated battery by deadly weapon can be crime of violence)
- Johnson v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 1265 (2010) (touching as physical force; limitations of related propositions)
- Flores v. Ashcroft, 350 F.3d 666 (7th Cir. 2003) (touching statute interpretations; ACCA-related reasoning)
- Fife, 624 F.3d 441 (7th Cir. 2010) (application to ACCA/4B1.2 context; parallel reasoning)
- Dismuke, 593 F.3d 582 (7th Cir. 2010) (divisible statute analysis in similar context)