United States v. Jessie Thomas ( 2020 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 19-3122
    ___________________________
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee
    v.
    Jessie Lee Thomas
    lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the Eastern District of Arkansas - Little Rock
    ____________
    Submitted: April 15, 2020
    Filed: July 2, 2020
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before SMITH, Chief Judge, BENTON and KOBES, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Jessie Lee Thomas pleaded guilty to one count of being a felon in possession
    of a firearm, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 922
    (g)(1), and one count of possessing an
    unregistered firearm, in violation of 
    26 U.S.C. § 5861
    (d). At sentencing, the district
    court1 enhanced Thomas’s sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA),
    after concluding that Thomas had three prior violent felony convictions. The district
    court determined that Thomas’s prior conviction for robbery, in violation of Ark.
    Code. Ann. § 5-12-102, qualified as a violent felony under the ACCA. Based on its
    determination that Thomas was an armed career criminal, the district court sentenced
    Thomas to 180 months’ imprisonment. Thomas appeals, arguing that his Arkansas
    robbery conviction is not a violent felony under the ACCA.
    The ACCA imposes a mandatory minimum sentence of 180 months’
    imprisonment if a defendant violates § 922(g) and “has three previous convictions
    . . . for a violent felony or a serious drug offense.” 
    18 U.S.C. § 924
    (e)(1). We review
    de novo whether Thomas’s robbery conviction qualifies as a violent felony under the
    ACCA. United States v. Jordan, 
    812 F.3d 1183
    , 1185 (8th Cir. 2016). “In
    determining whether a conviction is a violent felony, courts must start with the formal
    categorical approach and look only to the fact of conviction and the statutory
    definition of the prior offense.” 
    Id. at 1186
     (internal quotation omitted). For purposes
    of the ACCA, a violent felony is “any crime punishable by imprisonment for a term
    exceeding one year” that “has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use
    of physical force against the person of another.” 
    18 U.S.C. § 924
    (e)(2)(B)(i) (referred
    to as the “elements” clause). “[P]hysical force, or force capable of causing physical
    pain or injury, includes the amount of force necessary to overcome a victim’s
    resistance.” Stokeling v. United States, 
    139 S. Ct. 544
    , 555 (2019) (cleaned up).
    Thomas concedes that we have already held that the Arkansas robbery statute
    qualifies as a crime of violence under the elements clause of the Guidelines. See
    United States v. Smith, 
    928 F.3d 714
    , 716–17 (8th Cir. 2019) (applying Stokeling, 
    139 S. Ct. at 555
    ). Further, he admits that “we are bound by cases interpreting whether an
    1
    The Honorable J. Leon Holmes, United States District Judge for the Eastern
    District of Arkansas.
    -2-
    offense is a crime of violence under the Guidelines as well as cases interpreting
    whether an offense is a violent felony under the [ACCA].” United States v. Williams,
    
    537 F.3d 969
    , 971 (8th Cir. 2008). This is so because “[t]he definitions of ‘violent
    felony’ and ‘crime of violence’ are almost identical.” United States v. Johnson, 
    326 F.3d 934
    , 936 (8th Cir. 2003).
    However, Thomas argues that we are not bound by Smith because he raises
    issues not discussed in Smith. Specifically, Thomas contends that a conviction under
    the Arkansas robbery statute is not a violent felony because it criminalizes even mere
    touching and encompasses negligent and accidental contact. But, contrary to
    Thomas’s assertion, Smith directly forecloses this argument. In Smith, we explained
    that “Arkansas robbery requires sufficient force to overcome a victim’s resistance and
    does not criminalize mere snatching of property.” 928 F.3d at 717. Based on our
    holding in Smith, Arkansas robbery satisfies the elements clause to qualify as a
    violent felony under the ACCA. See id. Smith controls. See Williams, 
    537 F.3d at 971
    .
    Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
    ______________________________
    -3-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 19-3122

Filed Date: 7/2/2020

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 7/2/2020