Background
Raquan Scott pleaded guilty to violating the federal felon-in-possession statute. The district court enhanced his sentence by classifying his prior Virginia conviction for using a firearm during a robbery as a crime of violence under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Scott appealed, arguing the prior offense did not meet the definition of a crime of violence.
The court’s reasoning
The court applied the categorical approach to determine if the prior conviction qualified as a crime of violence. It concluded that the Virginia statute did not require the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against another person as an element. The court rejected the government’s argument that the statute satisfied the elements clause and found the government failed to prove the error was harmless due to the district court’s unclear reasoning and factual confusion regarding the defendant’s criminal history.
We conclude the district court’s legal analysis was faulty and the government has not carried its burden of showing that error was harmless.
Opinion at 2
The dissent
What it means going forward
Defendants in the Fourth Circuit can no longer be subject to the crime-of-violence enhancement for prior convictions under Virginia Code Section eighteen point two five three point one predicated on robbery. Sentencing courts must re-evaluate similar enhancements where the government has not clearly demonstrated that the underlying statute requires physical force as an element.