United States v. Tomonta Simmons
917 F.3d 312
4th Cir.2019Background
- Simmons was on federal supervised release when arrested after a 2017 high-speed chase in which a trooper's vehicle was sideswiped; Probation alleged he committed North Carolina assault with a deadly weapon on a government official (AWDWOGO) and other violations.
- The district court found Simmons drove the vehicle and proved the alleged violations, treating AWDWOGO as a Grade A supervised-release violation under U.S.S.G. § 7B1.1.
- Based on a criminal-history category V and a Grade A violation, the court imposed a 36-month revocation sentence (top of the 30–36 mo. Guidelines range).
- On appeal, counsel filed an Anders brief but the Fourth Circuit identified a nonfrivolous issue: whether AWDWOGO is a "crime of violence" under the 2016 Sentencing Guidelines (so as to be Grade A).
- The Fourth Circuit considered whether AWDWOGO fits either the Guidelines' enumerated-offenses clause (generic aggravated assault) or the force clause (use of physical force), applying the categorical approach and state-law definitions of assault.
- The court concluded AWDWOGO can be committed with "culpable negligence" (a mens rea below recklessness), so it is categorically not a "crime of violence," vacated Simmons's sentence, and remanded for resentencing under the correct Guidelines range (Grade B: 18–24 months).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether NC AWDWOGO is a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 (enumerated-offenses clause; generic aggravated assault) | Simmons: AWDWOGO is not a crime of violence because NC assault element may be satisfied by culpable negligence, which is broader than generic aggravated assault's mens rea | Govt: AWDWOGO matches generic aggravated assault; ordinary cases are purposeful/knowing so no realistic probability the statute covers lesser mens rea | Held: AWDWOGO is categorically broader than generic aggravated assault because NC assault permits culpable negligence; fails enumerated-offenses test |
| Whether AWDWOGO satisfies the Guidelines' force clause (use/attempted/threatened use of physical force) | Simmons: NW assault can be based on culpable negligence, which may be nonvolitional or negligent and thus not a "use" of force under Leocal | Govt: AWDWOGO involved deliberate conduct (e.g., driving as a deadly weapon) and therefore implicates the force clause | Held: AWDWOGO fails the force clause because culpable negligence can support conviction and negligent/merely accidental conduct does not constitute the "use" of force under Leocal |
| Whether the district court's classification error was subject to plain-error review and whether it was plain | Simmons: Though unobjected to below, prior Fourth Circuit law (Vinson) made the correct rule clear | Govt: Law was unsettled at sentencing, so any error was not plain | Held: Reviewed for plain error; Vinson (2015) made the relevant legal principle clear, so the district court plainly erred in treating AWDWOGO as a crime of violence |
| Remedy and effect on sentence | Simmons: Relieve sentencing anchored to Grade A; remand for proper Guidelines calculation | Govt: (implicitly) uphold sentence | Held: Vacated the revocation sentence and remanded for resentencing because proper classification reduces grade to B and lowers Guideline range (from 30–36 to 18–24 months) |
Key Cases Cited
- Vinson v. United States, 805 F.3d 120 (4th Cir. 2015) (North Carolina assault may be proved by culpable negligence; negligent conduct may not be a "use" of force)
- Peterson v. United States, 629 F.3d 432 (4th Cir. 2011) (categorical-analysis principles; culpable negligence is a lesser mens rea than recklessness)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (categorical approach to matching state offenses to generic federal definitions)
- Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1 (2004) (negligent or merely accidental conduct does not constitute a "use" of physical force)
- Voisine v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2272 (2016) (distinguishes reckless misdemeanor domestic-violence convictions as "use" of force; Court declined to extend to broader "crimes of violence" context)
- Carthorne v. United States, 726 F.3d 503 (4th Cir. 2013) (categorical analysis and comparison to ACCA/Guidelines definitions)
- Rosales-Mireles v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 1897 (2018) (guidelines miscalculation ordinarily justifies resentencing)