United States v. Warren Travis Golden
2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 1218
| 11th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Golden challenged a Florida aggravated-assault conviction being used to enhance his federal sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines’ definition of "crime of violence."
- The Guidelines provision at issue incorporates the elements-clause definition from U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(1), which mirrors ACCA’s elements clause.
- The panel majority held Turner v. Warden Coleman FCI controls and therefore affirmed the enhancement. Turner treated Florida aggravated assault as categorically a crime of violence under the elements clause.
- Golden argued Turner was wrong because Florida law permits convictions based on reckless (not only intentional) conduct, and a reckless mens rea cannot satisfy the elements clause’s "use of physical force" requirement per Eleventh Circuit precedent.
- Judge Jill Pryor concurred in the result but wrote separately urging en banc rehearing to overrule Turner, explaining Turner conflicted with earlier Eleventh Circuit decisions (Rosales-Bruno, Palomino Garcia) and with intervening Supreme Court decisions (Moncrieffe, Descamps, Mathis, Johnson).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Florida aggravated assault is a "crime of violence" under the Guidelines’ elements clause | Golden: statute can be violated with reckless conduct; recklessness does not satisfy the elements clause | Government/majority: Turner controls and treats Florida aggravated assault as categorically a crime of violence | Affirmed — bound by Turner, so the enhancement stands |
| Whether this panel may decline to follow Turner in light of perceived error and intervening Supreme Court decisions | Golden: Turner misapplied Eleventh Circuit and state-law precedent; Supreme Court authority undermines Turner | Government: Turner is binding precedent; later panels cannot overrule it | Panel cannot overrule Turner; en banc court may revisit it |
Key Cases Cited
- Turner v. Warden Coleman FCI, 709 F.3d 1328 (11th Cir. 2013) (held Florida aggravated assault qualifies as a violent felony under the elements clause)
- United States v. Palomino Garcia, 606 F.3d 1317 (11th Cir. 2010) (recklessness does not satisfy the "use of physical force" in the elements clause)
- United States v. Rosales-Bruno, 676 F.3d 1017 (11th Cir. 2012) (federal courts must follow state courts’ construction of state-law elements)
- Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S. Ct. 1678 (2013) (consult state caselaw to determine the least conduct criminalized under a state statute)
- Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (2013) (federal courts must focus on statutory elements, not facts, when applying the categorical approach)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (directs reliance on state-court decisions that definitively interpret state-law elements)
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (addressed invalidation of the ACCA residual clause; prompted resentencings and reexamination of predicate offenses)
- Smith v. GTE Corp., 236 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. 2001) (panels must follow prior panel precedent and may not create exceptions based on perceived error)