[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 17

- 14583 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1:16

- cr - 20840

- PCH

- 8

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus ALEXIS VALDES GONZALEZ, Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

________________________ ( November 13, 2018 ) Before WIL SON, JORDAN and HULL, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Case: 17-14583 Date Filed: 11/13/2018 Page: 1 of 72 After pleading guilty, Alexis Valdes Gonzalez appeals his 160

- month sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A)(viii ) , and 846, and p ossession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). On appeal, Valdes Gonzalez argues that the district court erred in designating him a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines. In p articular, Valdes Gonzalez contends that his Florida conviction for kidnapping does not qualify as a “crime of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a). After review, we affirm. I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND In the fall of 2015, as part of an investigati on into a Mi ami

- based drug trafficking organization , a confidential source made three controlled buys of methamphetamine from defendant Valdes Gonzalez. I n early 2016, the confidential source purchased a firearm and ammunition from Valdes Gonzalez, who is a convicted felon. Among Valdes Gonzalez’s prior felony convictions

were: (1) Florida convictions for kidnapping with a weapon and armed burglary with assault or battery in February 1998; and (2) a Florida conviction for possession with intent to sell, manufacture o r deliver cocaine and cannabis in November 2010.

Case: 17-14583 Date Filed: 11/13/2018 Page: 2 of 73 Pursuant to a plea agreement, Valdes Gonzalez pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 2 1 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1 ) , 841 (b )(1)(A)(viii), and 846 (C ount 1), and possession of a firearm and ammunition by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (Count 2)

. At sentencing, the district court determined, based on Valdes Gonzalez’s 1998 conviction for kidnapping a nd his 2010 conviction for possession of cocaine and marijuana with intent to sell, manufacture or deliver , that Valdes Gonzalez was a “career offender” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a). This designation resulted in an increased offense level and an enhanced criminal history category under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b), producing an advisory guidelines range of 262 to 327 months’ imprisonment. After hearing from the parties and considering the 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors , the district court varied downward by 102 months and imposed a total sentence of 160 month s’ imprisonment, consisting of a 160

- month sentence on Count 1 and a 120

- month sentence on Count 2, to be served concurrently with the sentence on Count 1. II. DISCUSSION A. Career Offender Guidelines
A defendant is a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines if: (1) he was at least 18 years old at the time he committed the instant offense of conviction;

Case: 17-14583 Date Filed: 11/13/2018 Page: 3 of 74 (2) the instant offense of conviction is a felony that is either a “crime of violence”
or a “ controlled substance offense”; and (3) he has at least two prior felony convictions for either a “crime of violence” or a “controlled substance offense.”
U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a). A “crime of violence” is defined as any felony that: (1) has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another, or (2) is murder, voluntary manslaughter, kidnapping , aggravated assault, a forcible sex offense, robbery, arson, extortion, or the use or unlawful possession of a fir earm described in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(a) or explosive material as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 841(c). U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a) (emphasis added). Section 4B1.2(a)(1) is commonly referred to as the “elements clause,” and § 4B1.2(a)(2) contains the “enumerated offenses

c lause.” See United States v. Lockley , 632 F.3d 1238, 1240

- 41 (11th Cir. 2011)

. A “controlled substance offense” is defined as a felony that “ prohibits the manufacture, import, export, distribution, or dispensin g of a controlled substance

. . . or the possession of a controlled substance . . . with intent to manufacture, import, export, distribute, or dispense. ” U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(b).
B. Valdes Gonzalez’s Claim In this appeal, Valdes Gonzalez does not dispute that he satisfies the first
two care er - offender criteria in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a)

. As to the third criteria

— whether Valdes Gonzalez has “at least two” qualifying prior felony convictions

— Valdes Gonzalez does not dispute that his prior Florida felony conviction for

Case: 17-14583 Date Filed: 11/13/2018 Page: 4 of 75 possession of cocaine and ma rijuana with intent to sell, manufacture , or deliver qualifies as a controlled substance offense. Thus, the only issue raised is whether Valdes Gonzalez has a second qualifying pr ior felony conviction. Valdes Gonzalez argues that his Florida kidnapping c onviction does not qualify as a predicate crime of violence as defined in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a). 1
As the district court noted at the time of Valdes Gonzalez’s sentencing, this Court has already concluded in In re Burgest , 829 F.3d 1285 (11th Cir. 2016), tha t Florida kidnapping categorically qualifies as a “crime of violence” under § 4B1.2 (a) ’s enumerated offenses clause. See In re Burgest , 829 F.3d at 1287. In that case, this Court said: “Burgest was classified as a career offender based on his two prior c onvictions for manslaughter and kidnapping. Both offenses are categorically crimes of violence. The commentary to section 4B1.2 states that ‘crime of violence’ includes . . . manslaughter [and] kidnapping .

. . U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 n.1.” Id. (quotation mark s omitted). The Burgest Court added that “we have recognized, based on the decision of the Supreme Court in Stinson v. United
States , that ‘ the definition of ‘crime of violence’ provided by the Guidelines commentary is authoritative. ’” Id. (quoting United States v. Hall , 714 F.3d 1270, 1274 (11th Cir. 2013) ) (citation omitted).

1 Th is Court reviews de novo whether a prior conviction qualifies as a “crime of violence” under the Sentencing Guidelines. Lockley , 632 F.3d at 1240.

Case: 17-14583 Date Filed: 11/13/2018 Page: 5 of 76 Thus, Valdes Gonzalez’s argument that his Florida kidnapping conviction is not a crime of violence is foreclosed by this Court’s binding precedent. See United
States v. Archer , 5 31 F.3d 1347 , 1352 (11th Cir. 2008) (providing that under this Circuit’s prio r panel precedent rule, th is Court is bound to follow a prior panel’s holding that has not been overruled or undermined to the point of abrogation by this Court sitting en banc or by the Supreme Court). Valdes Gonzalez argues that we are not bound by In re Burgest because it was decided in the context of an application for leave to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. This Court recently rejected such an argument, however, holding in a direct appeal case that “law established in published t hree

judge orders issued pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b) in the context of applications for leave to file a secon d or successive § 2255 motions [is] binding precedent on all subsequent panels of this Court, including those reviewing direct appeals and coll ateral attacks , ‘unless and until they are overruled or undermined to the point of abrogation by the Supreme Court or by this court sitting en banc .’” United States v. St. Hubert , 883 F.3d 1319, 1329 (11th Cir. 2018) (quoting Archer , 531 F.3d at 1352) (al terations omitted). While Va l des Gonzalez suggests St. Hubert was wrongly decided, we are bound by St. Hubert for the same reasons we are bound by In re Burgest . Neither this Court sitting en banc nor the Supreme Court has overruled or abrogated them.

Case: 17-14583 Date Filed: 11/13/2018 Page: 6 of 77 In light of our binding precedent, the district court correctly concluded that Valdes Gonzalez’s Florida kidnapping conviction qualified as a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2). Because Valdes Gonzalez had two qualifying prior felony con victions under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, the district court did not err in determining that Valdes Gonzalez was a career offender and calculating his advisory guidelines range under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(b). AFFIRMED. Case: 17-14583 Date Filed: 11/13/2018 Page: 7 of 7