USA v. Bigbeaver – Do It For The Caselaw

Holding: The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's application of Sentencing Guideline two A two point two to a defendant whose conduct involved strangling a child.
Standard: Kisor deference framework
Vote: Unpublished memorandum decision affirming the district court.
Practical effect: Sentencing courts in the Ninth Circuit must continue to apply the Sentencing Guidelines commentary that defines aggravated assault to include strangulation, regardless of the victim's relationship to the defendant.

The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court's sentencing decision involving a defendant convicted of felony child abuse and assault. The court held that the Sentencing Guidelines commentary correctly defined aggravated assault to include strangulation, even when the victim is a child.

Background

John Lee Bigbeaver pleaded guilty to felony child abuse and assault resulting in substantial bodily injury to a child under sixteen. He challenged the district court’s application of Sentencing Guideline two A two point two, which applies to aggravated assault conduct.

The court’s reasoning

The court applied the Kisor framework to determine whether to defer to the Guidelines commentary defining aggravated assault. The court found the term genuinely ambiguous because it is not defined in the Guidelines text and its meaning varies by context. The court concluded the commentary’s definition is reasonable because it aligns with the Guidelines’ structure, history, and state laws defining strangulation as aggravated assault. The court further determined the commentary represents the Sentencing Commission’s official position and substantive expertise, entitling it to controlling weight.

What it means going forward

Sentencing courts in the Ninth Circuit must continue to apply the Sentencing Guidelines commentary that defines aggravated assault to include strangulation, regardless of the victim’s relationship to the defendant.