Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-07-01048/USCOURTS-ca7-07-01048-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Bruce P. Hunt
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

* After an examination of the briefs and the record, we have concluded that

oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and the

record. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

 Submitted May 16, 2007* 

Decided May 16, 2007

Before

 Hon. WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

 Hon. KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge

 Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge

 

No. 07-1048

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

BRUCE P. HUNT,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States 

District Court for the Western 

District of Wisconsin

No. 06-CR-107-C-01

Barbara B. Crabb,

Chief Judge.

O R D E R

Bruce Hunt pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, 18

U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and after the judge determined that he had previously

committed three violent felonies he was sentenced to 180 months’ imprisonment as

an armed career criminal. Id. at § 924(e)(1). On appeal he argues that the district

court erred in classifying his earlier conviction for failing to report to jail as a

“violent felony.” Hunt acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by United

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

Case: 07-1048 Document: 10 Filed: 05/16/2007 Pages: 2
No. 07-1048 Page 2

States v. Golden, 466 F.3d 612 (7th Cir. 2006), which he urges us to overrule. For

the reasons already articulated in United States v. Chambers, 473 F.3d 724 (7th Cir.

2007), we decline to do so and affirm.

The Armed Career Criminal Act requires a minimum 15-year sentence if a

defendant has at least three previous “violent felony” convictions. 18 U.S.C.

§ 924(e)(1). Hunt’s presentence report listed three such qualifying convictions,

including a conviction for failing to report to county jail. Although we concluded in

Golden that failure to report to jail was a “violent felony” under § 924(e), 466 F.3d

at 615, Hunt nonetheless objected to the use of his conviction for failing to report to

jail as a basis for the § 924(e) enhancement. The sentencing court rejected Hunt’s

argument.

On appeal Hunt recognizes that Golden holds that failure to report to jail is a

violent felony under § 924(e) because it “involves conduct that presents a serious

potential risk of physical injury to another,” 466 F.3d at 613-14, 615 (quoting

18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii)). Nonetheless he argues that, in light of language in

other opinions and the Golden dissent, we should reconsider our holding in Golden. 

See Chambers, 473 F.3d at 727 (in dicta) (noting that future research establishing

whether failures to report or return to jail actually present a serious risk of physical

injury might call into question the characterization of such crimes as violent

felonies); Golden, 466 F.3d at 616-19 (Williams, J., dissenting) (reasoning that

failure to report to jail does not create a serious risk of physical injury, and opining

that characterizing it as such raises due process concerns); United States v. Piccolo,

441 F.3d 1084, 1088 (9th Cir. 2006) (holding that a peaceful failure to return to a

halfway house is not a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2), a provision

analogous to § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii)).

But in Chambers we recently rejected a similar request to overrule Golden,

noting that “we shrink from trying to overrule a decision that is only a few months

old . . . [and] that tracked an earlier and materially identical decision [United States

v. Bryant, 310 F.3d 550, 554 (7th Cir. 2002) (failure to return to a halfway house is

a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2))].” Chambers, 473 F.3d at 726. 

Hunt recognizes that in Chambers we noted that statistical evidence on the risk of

violence posed by failures to report to jail might call into question whether such

crimes have been properly characterized as violent felonies. But Hunt presented no

such evidence to the district court or here, nor has he presented any other

compelling reason to overrule Golden.

The district court’s decision is therefore AFFIRMED. 

 

Case: 07-1048 Document: 10 Filed: 05/16/2007 Pages: 2