U.S. v. Baxter

Decision Date26 April 2011
Docket NumberNo. 10–4080.,10–4080.
Citation642 F.3d 475
PartiesUNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee,v.Earnest Robert BAXTER, Defendant–Appellant.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit

642 F.3d 475

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff–Appellee,
v.
Earnest Robert BAXTER, Defendant–Appellant.

No. 10–4080.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Argued: March 25, 2011.Decided: April 26, 2011.


[642 F.3d 476]

ARGUED: Randy Virlin Cargill, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. Jean Barrett Hudson, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Larry W. Shelton, Federal Public Defender, Christine Madeleine Lee, Research and Writing Attorney, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. Timothy J. Heaphy, United States Attorney, R. Andrew Bassford, Assistant United States Attorney, Office of the United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.Before KING, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.Affirmed by published opinion. Judge DAVIS wrote the opinion, in which Judge KING and Judge KEENAN concurred.

OPINION
DAVIS, Circuit Judge:

Earnest Robert Baxter pled guilty to one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Baxter was sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), to the mandatory minimum period of incarceration: 180 months. Baxter appeals his sentence, contending, as he did before the district court, see United States v. Baxter, 677 F.Supp.2d 918 (W.D.Va.2010), that the government failed to satisfy its burden to establish that his 1976 burglary conviction in state court qualifies as a predicate offense under the ACCA. Like the district court, id. at 921–22, we conclude that the government satisfied its burden; accordingly, we affirm.

Under the ACCA, a defendant may be sentenced as an armed career criminal (and thus subject to a fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence) if he violates 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) and has at least three prior convictions for violent felonies and/or serious drug offenses. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). Whether a prior conviction qualifies as a predicate offense under § 924(e) is a question of statutory construction we review de novo. United States v. Brandon, 247 F.3d 186, 188 (4th Cir.2001).

To determine whether an offense under state law falls within the definition of a violent felony, courts generally employ a categorical approach, under which consideration is given only to the essential elements of the offense and the fact of conviction. See United States v. White, 571 F.3d 365, 368 (4th Cir.2009). Burglary is a “violent felony” under the ACCA. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1)(B)(ii). Interpreting the ACCA, the Supreme Court has held that “a person has been convicted of burglary ... if he is convicted of any crime, regardless of its exact definition or label, having the basic elements of unlawful or unprivileged entry into, or remaining in, a building or structure, with intent to commit a crime.” Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575, 599, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (1990).

While a sentencing court normally may look only to the statutory elements of an offense and the fact of the conviction, because some statutes (like the Virginia provisions at issue here) define burglary broadly to encompass enclosures other than “a building or structure,” the categorical approach “may permit the sentencing court to go beyond the mere fact of conviction” in certain cases. Id. at 602, 110 S.Ct. 2143. Thus, an offense will constitute burglary if the jury was required “to find all

[642 F.3d 477]

the elements of generic burglary in order to convict the defendant,” and “the indictment or information and jury instructions show that the defendant was charged only with a burglary of a building,” so “the jury necessarily had to find an entry of a building to convict.” Id. In cases where, as here, the defendant pled guilty to the prior offense, a federal sentencing court may consider certain court documents, including but not limited to the indictment, a transcript of the plea colloquy and/or the written plea...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • United States v. Hope
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • March 9, 2022
    ...as a predicate offense under [ACCA] is a question of statutory construction" that we generally review de novo. United States v. Baxter , 642 F.3d 475, 476 (4th Cir. 2011). But "[w]hen a defendant has not properly preserved [that] issue by presenting it to the district court ... we review hi......
  • United States v. Foster
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • March 8, 2012
    ...failed to carry its burden of proof was an affirmance of the lower court's imposition of an enhanced sentence. See United States v. Baxter, 642 F.3d 475 (4th Cir.2011); United States v. Proch, 637 F.3d 1262 (11th Cir.2011); United States v. Rainer, 616 F.3d 1212 (11th Cir.2010); United Stat......
  • United States v. Gomez
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • August 10, 2012
    ...under which consideration is given only to the essential elements of the offense and the fact of conviction.” United States v. Baxter, 642 F.3d 475, 476 (4th Cir.2011). We have found it appropriate to vary this approach only “where different types of behavior satisfy an element of the offen......
  • United States v. Vann
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit
    • October 11, 2011
    ...the statute meant before as well as after the decision of the case giving rise to that construction.”) (cited in United States v. Baxter, 642 F.3d 475, 478 n. 3 (4th Cir.2011) (holding that, under the modified categorical approach to the ACCA, the Virginia Supreme Court's authoritative inte......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT