Case o' The Week: Ninth Gives Taylor Sentencing a Werle - ACCA Violent Felonies in United States v. Werle
Complicated,
complex, tricky, technical – wonderful.
The Ninth’s latest Taylor decision is a riot.
United States v. Werle, 2015 WL
828132 (9th Cir. Mar. 3, 2016), decision available here.
Players: Decision by N.D. Cal Senior (and former Chief) D.J.
Claudia Wilken, joined by Judges Fletcher and Fisher. Big win for ED Cal AFPD
Matthew Campbell.
Facts: Werle entered a conditional plea to being a
felon in possession, after a suppression hearing. Id. at *1. The PSR claimed Werle fell within the ACCA, triggering a
fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence. Id.
Werle had a number of convictions for Washington State “felony riot.” Without
those riot priors he would have not qualified for the ACCA mand-min. Id.
Over defense
objection the district court held that the riot statute was overinclusive, but
divisible. Id. The district court then
conducted a modified categorical analysis, examined charging docs and plea
agreements from the riot priors, and concluded that they qualified as ACCA
predicate “violent felonies.” Id.
Werle appealed.
Issue(s): “In this case, we consider whether a conviction for
felony riot under a Washington state statute is a violent felony for purposes
of the ACCA sentencing enhancement.” Id.
at *1.
[Ed. Note:
Specifically, the issue was whether the riot prior qualified as a ‘violent felony’
under the “force” clause of the ACCA,
18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B).]
Held: “We
hold that is not, because it is overinclusive indivisible with respect to the
term, ‘force.’ Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing.” Id.
Of Note: “Limited, limited, limited” – sweet music to our
ears. Judge Wilken carefully explains that the scope of Taylor categorical inquiry is “limited.” Id. at *3. The application of the modified categorical approach is
“even more limited.” Id.
Why is the government so constrained, when it tries to establish predicates
for sentencing enhancements? The Court explains these limitations are “rooted
in the ACCA’s statutory language, the Sixth Amendment’s requirement that facts
that increase a defendant’s maximum penalty be proven to a jury beyond a
reasonable doubt, and practical concerns.” Id.
Judge Wilken then goes on to elaborate on why each of those concerns mandate
the “limited” inquiry for the Taylor
analysis.
The paragraph at *3, headnote [9] of Werle
is one of the cleanest, most-accessible explanations of how -- and why -- Taylor sentencing law works as it does:
well worth a close read and heavy citation (or cribbing wholesale into the Johnson Section 2255 motions being
frantically drafted in the Ninth).
How to Use:
The core holding
of Werle is this: if a statute is
overinclusive as to any element, and
indivisible as to that element, there is no modified categorical analysis. Id. at *4. Here, everyone agreed that
the statute was both overinclusive AND divisible as to one element of the riot
statute. Id. at *4 (person or
property target of force). However, the Ninth holds that the statute was also
overinclusive and indivisible as to another
element (the degree of force). Id. at
*5. Use Werle
to force the government through the many, many hoops necessary before modified-categorical-land.
(And don’t overlook the Court’s rejection of
the government’s argument regarding “armed with a deadly weapon” – analysis
ripe for exportation to other “armed” felonies in our Johnson saga. Id. at *5)
(“[T]he fact that an individual is armed does not necessarily mean that he or
she has used the weapon in any way.”)
For Further
Reading: The San Francisco hearings of the CJA
Committee concluded last week. All written testimony from these hearings can now
be found here.
Videos of
the testimony will be up soon –make a point to watch Panel Six (five fearless CJA Reps, very
literally “speaking truth to power.”)
Image
of “Riot” from http://images2.fanpop.com/image/photos/9500000/riot-paramore-9530294-1024-503.jpg
Steven
Kalar, Federal Public Defender, N.D. Cal. Website at www.ndcalfpd.org
.
.
Labels: 18 USC 924(e), ACCA, Categorical analysis, Crime of Violence, Fisher, Johnson, Modified categorical analysis, Taylor Analysis, W. Fletcher
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home