United States v. McAdory

Summary

The Ninth Circuit reversed Ahmad McAdory’s conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Applying United States v. Valencia-Mendoza, the court held that a Washington conviction qualifies as a predicate felony only if the defendant was actually exposed to more than one year of imprisonment under the state’s mandatory sentencing scheme. Because McAdory’s prior convictions had sentencing ranges of one year or less and lacked findings supporting an upward departure, the court instructed the district court to vacate the conviction and dismiss the indictment.

Holdings

1. A Washington conviction qualifies as a predicate felony under § 922(g)(1) only if the defendant was actually exposed to a sentence exceeding one year under Washington's mandatory sentencing scheme, including applicable sentencing factors and any supported exceptional sentence, rather than merely being subject to a state statutory maximum exceeding one year.
2. A published Ninth Circuit decision's reasoned and deliberate resolution of an issue germane to the case becomes circuit law even when the resolution is not strictly necessary to the prior disposition.

Questions Presented

1. Whether McAdory's three Washington convictions were offenses punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year and therefore qualifying predicate felonies under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
2. Whether the Ninth Circuit was bound by United States v. Valencia-Mendoza's interpretation of the phrase "punishable by" even though Valencia-Mendoza arose under a different statutory provision and treated § 922(g)(1) in reasoning characterized as dicta.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded