Carr

United States v. Carr

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 25, 200807-30133California1,888 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

[1] We review de novo whether a prior conviction may serve as a predicate offense for a felon-in-possession charge. United States v. Simpson, 442 F.3d 737, 738 (9th Cir. 2006) (per curiam). Carr’s indictment for violating § 922(g)(1) can- not stand unless Carr “has [previously] been convicted in any court of [ ] a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year.” 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The term by which a crime is “punishable” is determined by the statutory maximum punishment, not the actual term imposed or served. United States v. Murillo, 422 F.3d 1152, 1154 (9th Cir. 2005). The phrase “crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year” has been further defined not to include “any State offense classified by the laws of the State as a mis- demeanor and punishable by a term of imprisonment of two years or less.” 18 U.S.C. § 921(a)(20)(B). “What constitutes a conviction of [a qualifying] crime shall be determined in accordance with the law of the jurisdiction in which the pro- ceedings were held.” Id. § 921(a)(20).

[2] Under Washington law, it is ordinarily a gross misde- meanor to violate a court-issued protection order. Id. §…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.