# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 2- 22 98

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Mi ch ael D. Ram se y

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Jan ua ry

18 , 20 13 Fi le d: Jan ua ry

31 , 20 13 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __
Befo re BYE an d M ELLOY, Cir cu it Ju dg es , and KOPF, Dis tri ct Ju dg e. 1

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Mi ch ael Ram se y pl ead ed gu il ty to be in g a fel on in po ss es si o n of a fir earm

. Afte r it co nc lu de d Ram se y was an arm ed care er cri m in al

, se e 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(1 ),

The Hon or ab le Ri ch ard G. Kop f, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1 of Nebr as ka , si tt in g b y

de si gn at io n.th e di st ric t co ur t se nt en ced Ram se y to 18 8 m o n t h s o f i mpri so nm en t. On ap pe al

, 2

Ram se y co nt en ds (1 ) th e "r es id ua l cl au se " of th e Arm ed Care er Cri m in al Act (ACCA)
is un co ns ti tu ti on al ly va gu e; (2 ) hi s ro bb ery an d arm ed cri m in al act io n co nv ic ti on s are

a si ng le of

fen se fo r se nt en ci ng pu rp os es , le av in g hi m on e co nv ic ti on sh or t of th e th ree pr ed ic at e co n v i c ti on s req ui red fo r ACCA se nt en ci ng ; an d (3 ) hi s pr ed ic at e

co nv ic ti on s are an el em en t of th e ACCA of fen se an d m

us t be pr ov ed to a jury be y on d

a reas on ab le do ub t. Bec au se each of Ram se y 's a r g um en ts is fo recl os ed by ei th er Su pr em e Co ur t p rece de nt or Ei gh th Cir cu it pre ced en t, we af fir m

.

Ram se y arg ue s th e "i nh eren tl y va gu e an d am or ph ou s qu al it y of th e st at ut or y la ng ua ge of t he res id ua l cl au se " m ak es it un co ns ti tu ti on al ly va gu e. App el la nt 's B r. 7; se e al so 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) (res id ua l cl au se ). Ci ti ng Ju st ic e S c a l i a ' s di ss e n t i n g op in io ns in rece nt Su pr em e Co ur t ACCA cas es , Ram se y cl ai m s th e la ng ua ge of th e res id ua l cl au se do es no t gi ve p e r s o n s of or di na ry in te ll ig en ce fai r

no ti ce of th e st at ut e's reac h. See Derb y v. Uni te d St at es , 1 3 1 S

. Ct

. 28 58
, 28 59 (2 01 1) (Sca li a, J., di ss en ti ng fro m de ni al of cert io rari ); Sy ke s v. Un it ed St at es , 1 31
S. Ct

. 22 67
, 22 87 -8 8 (2 01 1) (Sca li a, J., di ss en ti ng ); Uni te d St at es v. Bat ch el de r, 44 2
U.S. 11 4, 12 3 (1 97 9) (q uo ta ti on an d ci ta ti on om it te d) (co nc lu di ng st at ut es whi ch do

no t gi ve pe rs on s of or di na ry in te ll ig en ce fai r no ti ce of wha t co nd uc t is pr oh ib it ed are

un co ns ti tu ti on al ly va gu e). Rev ie win g Ram se y 's co ns ti tu ti on al cl ai m de no vo , U ni te d
St at es v. Sm it h, 65 6 F.3 d 82 1, 8 2 6 ( 8 th Ci r. 20 11 ), cer t. de ni ed

, 13 2 S. Ct

. 15 86 (2 01 2) , we di sa gr ee b ecau se th e Su pr em e Co ur t has reject ed th is arg um en t t wice in
th e la st si x y ea r s

. Sy ke s, 13 1 S. Ct

. at 22 77 (q uo ta ti on an d ci ta ti on om it te d) (co nc lu di ng "t he res id ua l cl au se

. . . pr ov i d e s g ui da nc e th at al lo ws a pe rs on to

co nf or m hi s or he r co nd uc t wit h th e la w"); Uni te d St at es v. Ja m es , 55 0 U.S. 19 2, 21 0

n

. 6 ( 20 07 ) ("[ W ]e are no t pe rs ua de d by Ju st ic e Scal ia 's su gg es ti on

. . . th at t h e

The Hon or ab le Howar d F. Sach s, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 2 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.

-2

-res id ua l pr ov is io n is un co ns ti tu ti on al ly va gu e."). Ram se y 's arg um en t is at od ds wit h

two di rect st at em en ts fro m th e Su pr em e Co ur t, an d a cco rd in gl y , we m us t re ject i t.

Ram se y fu rth er arg ue s th e di st ric t co ur t vi ol at ed hi s Si xt h Am en dm en t rig ht to

a jury tri al be cau se th e c o u r t, rat he r th an a jury, de te rm in ed hi s two ro bb ery an d

arm ed cri m in al act io n co nv ic ti on s o c c ur red on di ffer en t oc cas io ns rat he r th an as a

res ul t of a co nt in uo us co ur se of cri m in al co nd uc t. See App ren di v. New Je rs ey , 53 0
U.S. 46 6, 49 0 (2 00 0) ("Ot he r th an th e fact of a pr io r co nv i c t i o n, an y fact th at
in crea se s th e pe na lt y fo r a cri m e be y on d th e pr es cri be d st at ut or y m ax im um m us t be

su bm it te d to a ju r y, an d pr ov ed be y on d a reas on ab le do ub t." ). If th e co nv ic ti on s

res ul te d fro m a co nt in uo us co ur se of cri m in al co nd uc t, R a ms e y c la im s, on ly on e

co nv ic ti on wou ld co un t fo r ACCA p ur po se s, an d R am se y

wou ld no t h av e th e th ree
req ui red co nv ic ti on s. See 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e)( 1) ; Un it ed Sta te s v . W il lo ug hb y , 65 3
F.3 d 73 8, 74 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ). App lying de no vo rev ie w, Sm it h, 65 6 F.3 d at 82 6, we di sa gr ee be cau se Ram se y 's arg um en t is on ce ag ai n fo recl os ed by pr eced en t. W e ha ve
pr ev io us ly he ld th e qu es ti on of whe th er pr io r fel on ie s were co m m it te d o n s e p arat e

oc cas io ns m ay be res ol ve d by a jud ge

. Uni te d St at es v. W il so n, 40 6 F.3 d 10 74
, 10 75 (8 th Ci r. 20 05 ), ab ro ga te d on ot he r gr ou nd s by Uni te d St at es v. Mi ll er, 30 5 F. App 'x
30 2, 30 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ) (p er cu ria m ) (u np ub li sh ed ); Uni te d St at es v. Mar cu ss en , 40 3
F.3 d 98 2, 98 5 (8 th Ci r. 2 0 0 5 ) ( " Onc e th e se nt en ci ng co ur t de te rm in es th at a pr io r

c o n v i ct io n ex is ts , it is a le ga l qu es ti on fo r th e co ur t whe th er th e cri m e m eet s th e 'cri m e of vi ol en ce' de fin it io n

. . . ."). Bec au se "o ne pa ne l is bo un d by th e de ci si on of

a pr io r pa ne l" in ou r ci rcu it

, Uni te d St at es v. Bet ch er, 53 4 F.3 d 82 0, 82 3- 24 (8 th Ci r. 20 08 ) (q uo ta ti on an d ci ta ti on om it te d)

, we m us t reject Ram se y 's arg um en t in li gh t of

ou r pr io r ho ld in gs

.

Fi na ll y , Ram se y co nt en ds th e di st ric t co ur t erre d whe n it se nt en ced hi m un de r A C C A b e c au se th e in di ct m en t di d no t ch arg e Ram se y wit h ha vi ng th ree pr ed ic a t e

co nv ic ti on s. Ram s e y co nc ed es App ren di ex cep te d "t he fact of a pr io r co nv ic ti on "
fro m th e ru le req ui rin g an y f act whi ch in crea se s a cri m in al pe na lt y be y on d th e

-3

-st at ut or y m ax im um be pr ov en to a jury b ey on d a r e a s o n a b l e do ub t. App ren di , 5 30
U.S. a t 4 9 0. He al so co nc ed es reci di vi sm , as a ba si s fo r in crea si ng an of fen de r's

se nt en ce, is a s e n t e n c i ng fact or whi ch ne ed no t be ch arg ed in th e in di ct m en t.
Alm en da rez- Torr es v. Uni te d St at es , 52 3 U.S. 22 4
, 2 3 0 ( 1 99 8)

. He su bm it s, ho wev er, Alm en da rez- Torr es was wro ng ly de ci d e d a n d "'[i ]nnu m erab le cri m in al
de fen da nt s ha ve be en un co ns ti tu ti on al ly se nt en ced ' un de r it s fla w e d ru le ." App el la nt 's Br. 15 (q uo ti ng Sh ep ard v. Uni te d St at es , 54 4 U.S. 13
, 27 (2 00 5) (Tho m as , J., con cu rri ng in pa rt and co nc ur rin g in jud gm en t))

. Aga in

, we rev ie w de

no vo

. Sm it h, 65 6 F.3 d at 8 2 6

. R a ms ey co rrec tl y no te s reci di vi sm "g oe s to th e
pu ni sh m en t on ly." Alm en da rez- Torr es , 52 3 U

. S. at 24 4 (em ph as is rem ov ed ) (q uo ta ti on an d ci ta ti on om it te d)

. B e c a u se reci di vi sm is a pe na lt y pr ov is io n rat he r th an a se pa rat e cri m e, th e go ve rn m en t i s n o t r e qu ire d to ch arg e th e fact of a pr io r

co nv ic ti on or pr ov e it to a jury. Id

. at 22 6- 27

. Su bs eq ue nt Su pr em e Co ur t de ci si on s ha ve reaf fir m ed th is co nc lu si on

. Uni te d St at es v. Bo ok er, 54 3 U.S. 22 0, 24 4 (2 00 5) ; App ren di

, 53 0 U.S. at 49 0. The Eig ht h C i rcu it ha s reco gn iz ed as m uc h. Uni te d
St at es v. So hn

, 56 7 F.3 d 39 2, 39 4 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ); Uni te d St at es v. C a mp b e l l

, 2 7 0
F.3 d 7 02 , 70 8 (8 th Cir . 20 01 ). W e reject Ram se y 's a rg um en t t o t he co nt rary.

The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-4

-