Thursday, June 30, 2011

U.S. v. Snyder, No. 10-30148 (6-30-11) (Bea with Ikuta; Tashima concurring).

You can run but you can't hide from Supreme Court precedent. That is basically the holding here, where the 9th vacates a sentence and remands for imposition of a mandatory ACCA term. The defendant plead to being a felon in possession. One prior felony was an attempt to elude police under an Oregon statute. The 9th holds that U.S. v. Sykes, affirming the 7th Cir, 2011 WL 2224437 (June 9, 2011), is close enough to control. Sykes involved fleeing police was a violent offense, and so the 9th concludes is this one. The 9th also holds, for another prior, that a no contest plea has the same effect as a guilty plea. It also concludes that while the 9th has recognized that Oregon's burglary statute is broader than the Taylor categorical burglary, the burglary here, under a modified categorical approach, can be categorized as a burglary of a building because the indictment listed an address. Concurring, Tashima states that he is bound by U.S. v. Stephens, 237 F.3d 1031 (9th Cir. 2001), where a street address and a "building" are sufficient for a finding of a modified categorical approach. Tashima points out that an address and a "building" could be a ten-acre plot full of trucks, RVs, booths, and sheds. Use of an address and a term "building," to him, does not narrow the broad category to an acceptable Taylor category.


Post a Comment

<< Home