From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Preston

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Apr 17, 2019
No. 18-12343 (11th Cir. Apr. 17, 2019)

Opinion

No. 18-12343

04-17-2019

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TEDAREL LESHUN PRESTON, Defendant-Appellant.


[DO NOT PUBLISH] Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 0:18-cr-60008-BB-1 Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Before TJOFLAT, JORDAN, and EDMONDSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Tedarel Leshun Preston appeals his 15-year sentence -- which was enhanced under the Armed Career Criminal Act ("ACCA"), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) -- imposed after he was found guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). On appeal, Preston argues that the district court erred when it determined that he was an armed career criminal; he says his Florida aggravated-assault conviction should not be an ACCA predicate offense. He argues that Turner v. Warden Coleman FCI (Medium), 709 F.3d 1328, 1338 (11th Cir. 2013), abrogated on other grounds by Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), should be overruled and that the analysis in Turner has been undermined to the point of abrogation.

We review de novo whether a defendant's prior convictions qualify as violent felonies under the ACCA. United States v. Hill, 799 F.3d 1318, 1321 (11th Cir. 2015). Under our prior-panel precedent rule, a prior panel's holding is binding on all subsequent panels unless and until it is overturned or undermined to the point of abrogation by the Supreme Court or by us sitting en banc. United States v. Archer, 531 F.3d 1347, 1352 (11th Cir. 2008) (providing that "[w]hile an intervening decision of the Supreme Court can overrule the decision of a prior panel of our court, the Supreme Court decision must be clearly on point").

The ACCA provides that a defendant convicted of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon who has three previous convictions for a violent felony or a serious drug offense shall be imprisoned not less than 15 years. 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). "Violent felony" is defined, in relevant part, as a crime punishable by a term of imprisonment 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). We have stated that, because the definition of "violent felony" under the ACCA is virtually identical to the definition of "crime of violence" used in provisions of the Sentencing Guidelines, case law interpreting the Guidelines definitions is instructive in the ACCA context. See United States v. Hall, 714 F.3d 1270, 1272 (11th Cir. 2013) (comparing ACCA "violent felony" definition to U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2), which incorporates identical "crime of violence" definition from U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)); United States v. Vail-Bailon, 868 F.3d 1293, 1298 n.8 (11th Cir. 2017) (en banc), cert. denied, 138 S. Ct. 2620 (2018) (comparing ACCA "violent felony" definition to identical "crime of violence" definition from U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2).

In Turner, we held that aggravated assault under Fla. Stat. § 784.021 is a violent felony under the elements clause of the ACCA. Turner, 709 F.3d at 1338. After Johnson, we reaffirmed Turner's holding in United States v. Golden, 854 F.3d 1256 (11th Cir. 2017), and in United States v. Deshazior, 882 F.3d 1352 (11th Cir.), cert. denied, 2019 U.S. LEXIS 1468 (U.S. Feb. 25, 2019) (No. 17-8766). Specifically, in those cases, we relied upon prior panel precedent in Turner to conclude that aggravated assault under Fla. Stat. § 784.021 is a crime of violence under the identical definition provided in U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a)(2), and a violent felony under the ACCA. See Golden, 854 F.3d at 1257 (holding that, "even if Turner is flawed, that does not give us, as a later panel, the authority to disregard it"); Deshazior, 882 F.32 at 1355.

Accordingly, we are bound by our precedent that aggravated assault constitutes a crime of violence under the ACCA, even after Johnson. See Turner, 709 F.3d at 1338; Golden, 854 F.3d at 1257; Deshazior, 882 F.32 at 1355. Therefore, we affirm.

AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

United States v. Preston

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
Apr 17, 2019
No. 18-12343 (11th Cir. Apr. 17, 2019)
Case details for

United States v. Preston

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. TEDAREL LESHUN PRESTON…

Court:UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

Date published: Apr 17, 2019

Citations

No. 18-12343 (11th Cir. Apr. 17, 2019)

Citing Cases

Matthews v. United States

At least four times post-Descamps, the Eleventh Circuit has had a case that presented the question of whether…