Summary
The Sixth Circuit held that a § 2255 petitioner challenging a 60-month consecutive sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) for using a firearm during a crime of violence must show prejudice—i.e., that neither predicate offense qualified under the elements clause—even if the sentencing record is silent as to whether the district court relied on the now-unconstitutional residual clause of § 924(c)(3)(B). Because aiding and abetting attempted robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2111 requires force, violence, or intimidation, it categorically qualifies as a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A)'s elements clause. The court affirmed denial of relief, concluding that the petitioner failed to establish prejudice from any potential reliance on the residual clause.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court's silence on whether it relied on the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B) entitles Harris to vacatur of his consecutive 60-month sentence.
- Whether Harris's predicate offenses of aiding and abetting second-degree murder and aiding and abetting attempted robbery qualify as crimes of violence under the elements clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A).
Holdings
- Because 18 U.S.C. § 2111 has, as an essential element, 'the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another,' it is a crime of violence for purposes of § 924(c)(3)(A)'s elements clause. Harris thus has failed to establish any prejudice from the imposition of his § 924(c) sentence.
Key quotations
“Because 18 U.S.C. § 2111 has, as an essential element, 'the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another,' it is a crime of violence for purposes of § 924(c)(3)(A)'s elements clause. Harris thus has failed to establish any prejudice from the imposition of his § 924(c) sentence. Consequently, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court denying Harris's second or successive § 2255 motion.” (Page 13)
“[A]ny person who, during and in relation to any crime of violence . . . for which the person may be prosecuted in a court of the United States, uses or carries a firearm . . . shall, in addition to the punishment provided for such crime of violence . . . be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of not less than 5 years.” (Page 5)
“Because a district court may enhance the prison term under § 924(c) for the use or carrying of a firearm during and in relation to even one offense that can be considered a 'crime of violence,' we may affirm the district court's judgment as long as Harris's conviction for aiding and abetting attempted robbery involves the 'use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another.'” (Page 11)
Factual background
In April 1996, two seventeen-year-olds, Gary Duane Harris and Anthony Charles Gaines, Jr., approached two soldiers near a convenience store on the United States Army base in Fort Campbell, Kentucky. In an attempt to rob the soldiers, Gaines pulled a handgun from his clothing. As Gaines attempted to transfer the weapon to his other hand, the gun discharged, and a bullet struck Private First Class Michael Alonso-Caravia in the neck, killing him. Harris pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting second-degree murder, aiding and abetting attempted robbery, and aiding and abetting using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence.
Procedural history
Harris pleaded guilty to aiding and abetting second-degree murder, attempted robbery, and using/carrying a firearm during a crime of violence. He was sentenced to 420 months and 180 months concurrent, plus 60 months consecutive. The conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. Initial collateral attacks were unsuccessful. In 2019, this court authorized a second or successive § 2255 motion. The district court denied the motion, and Harris appealed.