United States v. Gregory Lee Chatman

INTRODUCTION

In 1984 the United States Congress enacted the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C.App. § 1202(a) (repealed and later incorporated into 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e)(1)) (“the Act”). The Act provides a mandatory 15 year prison sentence for “a person who violates section 922(g) [firearm offense] ... and has three previous convictions by any court ... for a violent felony____” Violent felony is defined to include within its provisions “burglary.” 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e)(2)(B)(ii).

Appellant Gregory L. Chatman was caught stealing property from an unoccupied car. A patdown search revealed a gun in his waistband. He was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922 (g)(1) for being a felon in possession of a firearm. Chatman was sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e)(1), to fifteen years in federal prison, without the possibility of parole, probation or a suspension of sentence. Chatman had previously pleaded guilty to three other counts of “auto burglary” under California law. In each of the prior instances, Chatman was unarmed.

ISSUE

Chatman attacks his enhanced sentence on several grounds. We do not reach most them, 1 for we find the following issue dis-positive:

We…

dissenting:

I dissent from the majority’s holding, which follows the Fourth Circuit’s recent holding that Congress intended to apply the common law definition of burglary for purposes of implementing the sentence enhancement statute. See United States v. Headspeth, 852 F.2d 753 (4th Cir.1988). Although, like the majority, I am loath to create an unnecessary circuit split, using the common law definition creates so many practical and interpretive difficulties that I am persuaded that Congress did not intend it. Instead, Congress clearly expected to take a state burglary conviction as it finds it on a defendant’s rap sheet.

First, my survey of the laws of the fifty states and the District of Columbia indicates that only two states, Maryland and Virginia, retain all elements of the common law crime of burglary (and even these two states seem to use a definition of “nighttime” different from that used at common law). Thus, a burglary conviction in every jurisdiction except these two would require a federal court to conduct an inquiry into whether one or more of the elements has been satisfied. Not only is this procedure cumbersome, but it seems likely that if Congress had intended…

869 F.2d 525 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Gregory Lee CHATMAN, Defendant-Appellant. No. 87-5351. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Aug. 1, 1988. Decided March 9, 1989. H. Dean Steward, Federal Public Defenders, Santa Ana, Cal., for defendant-appellant. Harriet M. Rolnick, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Before FLETCHER, CANBY and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. CANBY, Circuit Judge: INTRODUCTION 1 In 1984 the United States Congress enacted the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C.App. Sec. 1202(a) (repealed and later incorporated into 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924 (e)(1)) ("the Act"). The Act provides a mandatory 15 year prison sentence for "a person who violates section 922(g) [firearm offense] ... and has three previous convictions by any court ... for a violent felony...." Violent felony is defined to include within its provisions "burglary." 18 U.S.C. Sec. 924 (e)(2)(B)(ii). 2 Appellant Gregory L. Chatman was caught stealing property from an unoccupied car. A patdown search revealed a gun in his waistband. He was indicted under 18 U.S.C. Sec.…