United States v. Gary Lamont Williams, A/k/a/ Hiriam King Williams

Good Law
47 F.3d 993·95 Daily Journal DAR 1323·1995 WL 32009·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 1680·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 736
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 30, 199594-50065California729 words

Opinion

Opinion

Schroeder, J.

Gary Lamont Williams pleaded 'guilty to armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a) and (d). Williams appeals from his 188-month sentence imposed under the Sentencing Guidelines. He claims his sentence was improperly enhanced by the district court’s application of the Career Offender provisions set forth in United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.) § 4B1.1 (Nov. 1990). The court found that Williams had been convicted of two prior “crimes of violence” — a prerequisite to applying the Guidelines’ Career Offender provision. Williams claims that one of the prior convictions was not a “crime of violence.” That conviction was a 1981 California conviction for second-degree burglary in violation of § 459 of the California Penal Code.

The Sentencing Guidelines define the term “crime of violence” to include

U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(1).

The California burglary statute under which Williams was convicted in 1981 provided in relevant part:

Cal.Penal Code § 459 (Deering 1978).

In California, first-degree burglary involves entry of an inhabited dwelling or other building at night, while a burglary committed at any other time constitutes second-degree burglary. Cal.Penal Code § 460…

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.