Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10441/USCOURTS-ca5-14-10441-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Mario Munoz-Navarro
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-10441

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

MARIO MUNOZ-NAVARRO, 

 Defendant - Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

Before REAVLEY, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

STEPHEN A. HIGGINSON, Circuit Judge:

Mario Munoz-Navarro pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a 

prohibited person, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). His presentence report, 

prepared by a probation officer, recommended that he was subject to an

enhanced sentence of fifteen years to life imprisonment under the Armed 

Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). Munoz-Novarro objected 

to the enhanced sentence on several grounds; among them was an argument—

foreclosed by Supreme Court case law at the time—that ACCA is 

unconstitutionally vague. The district court overruled that objection, and his 

others, and sentenced him, under ACCA, to the mandatory-minimum sentence 

of 180 months of imprisonment and two years of supervised release. MunozUnited States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 21, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 14-10441 Document: 00513241052 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/21/2015
No. 14-10441

2

Navarro timely appealed. We vacate and remand for resentencing in light of 

the Supreme Court's intervening decision in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. 

Ct. 2551 (2015). 

ACCA authorizes enhanced penalties for defendants who have three or 

more prior convictions for “violent felonies” committed on different occasions. 

18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1). The Act defines “violent felonies” to include three 

categories of offenses. First, violent felonies include all “offense[s] that ha[ve] 

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). Second, violent 

felonies include four enumerated offenses: burglary, arson, extortion, and 

offenses “involv[ing] use of explosives.” Id. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). Finally, violent 

felonies include offenses “otherwise involv[ing] conduct that presents a serious 

potential risk of physical injury to another.” Id. This last category is known as 

the “residual clause.” Johnson, 135 S. Ct. at 2556.

After briefing and oral argument were complete in this appeal, the 

Supreme Court issued Johnson, holding that the residual clause is 

unconstitutionally vague. 135 S. Ct. at 2557. Munoz-Novarro’s case is before 

us on direct review, so Johnson applies, see Griffith v. Kentucky, 479 U.S. 314, 

328 (1987), and decides this appeal. Munoz-Novarro’s presentence report

identified five potential ACCA predicate offenses: burglary of a habitation, 

attempted burglary of a habitation, evading arrest with a vehicle, attempted 

escape, and evading arrest without a vehicle. The government does not dispute 

that four of the five potential predicates—all but the completed burglary

offense—could qualify as violent felonies only under the residual clause. After 

Johnson, therefore, Munoz-Novarro does not qualify for an enhanced penalty 

under ACCA.

Although Munoz-Novarro’s plea agreement included a waiver of his right 

to appeal his sentence, the government has elected not to rely on appeal 

 Case: 14-10441 Document: 00513241052 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/21/2015
No. 14-10441

3

waivers in ACCA cases in which “the defendant is, post Johnson, ineligible for 

the 15-year minimum sentence created by the [Act].” Consistent with that 

policy, the government no longer relies on Munoz-Novarro’s appeal waiver 

here. 

We vacate the sentence imposed by the district court and remand for 

resentencing.

 Case: 14-10441 Document: 00513241052 Page: 3 Date Filed: 10/21/2015