FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT APR 30, 2007 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 12617 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D o c k e tN o . 0 5 - 8 0 1 2 5 - C R - D MM U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A , P la in tif f - A p p e lle e , v ersu s J A M E S W A L K E R , a .k .a . K e ith T a y lo r , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lla n t.

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe S outhe r n D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( A p r i l 30, 2007) B efo re B IR C H , B L A C K an d W IL S O N , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

J a m e s W a lk e rap p e a ls h is s e n te n c e im p o s e d a f te rh e p le d g u ilty to k n o w i n g l y a n d i n t e n t i o n a l l y d i s tr i b u t i n g c r a c k c o c a i n e , i n v i o l a t i o n o f 2 1 U . S. C. § 8 4 1 (a)(1 ). W al k er co n t en d s th e d i stri ctco u rterred w h en i tcl assi fi ed h i m as a c a r e e rof f e nde rbe c a us e hi s pr i orc onvi c t i on f orba tt e r y on a l a w e nf

or c e m e nt offi ce r i s nota c ri m e of vi ol ence as defi ned b y U . S . S . G . § 4 B 1. 2(a) . W al ker f u r th e ra s s e r ts h is p r io rc o n v ic tio n f o rb a tte r y o n a la w e n f

o r c e m e n t o f

f ic e rs h o u ld notbe us e d t o e nha nc e hi s s e nt e nc e s i nc e the pr i orc onvi c t i on w a s notpr ove n t o a j ury bey on d a re as on abl e dou btno r a dm i tt ed by hi m i n h i s pl ea . T he di stri ctcourt d i d n o te r r , a n d w e a f

f i r m. I . DI S C US S I ON A . C ri m e of

V i ol ence W al ker a ss ert s hi s pri or conv i ct i on for batt ery on a l aw enforce m entoffi ce r doe s notne c e s s a r i l y i nvol ve the us e orthr e a tof us e of phy s i c a l f

or c e , a nd, c o n s e q u e n t l y , th e o f

f e n s e c a n n o tb e u s e d t o c l a s s i f y h i m a s a c a r e e ro f

f e n d e r . He c ont e nds hi s c a s e i s a na l ogous t o Sh epard v. U ni t ed Stat es , 12 5 S . C t . 12 54 (200 5), a s ba tt e r y i s de f

i ne d m or e br oa dl y i n F l or i da tha n the de f i ni t i on of a “ c r i m e of vi ol ence ” und erU . S . S . G . § 4 B 1. 2(a) . W al ker a rgues thati n l i gh tof Sh ep a rd , the di stri ctcourterre d b y notexam i ni ng the st atut ory def i ni t i on of bat t ery und er3

F l or i da l a w t o de t e r m i ne w he the ri ti n f a c tc ons t i tut e s a c r i m e of vi ol e nc e unde rthe S e n te n c in g G u id e lin e s . W e have previ ou sl y hel d t hatbatt ery on a l aw enforce m entoffi ce r und er F lo r id a la w is a c r im e o f v io le n c e . U

ni t ed Stat es v. G l over , 431 F . 3d 744, 749 ( 11th C i r . 2005) . I n Sh ep a rd , the S up re m e C ou rtl i m i t ed the types of evi dence a di stri ctcourtca n con st i tut i on al l y c on si der t o d et erm i ne w hether apri or bu rgl ary c onvi c t i on qua l i f

i e s a s a vi ol e ntf

e l ony f orpurpos e s of

the A C C A w he r e the s ta tu to r y d e f

in itio n o f b u r g la r y in c lu d e s b o th v io le n t a n d n o n - v io le n t c o n d u c t. Sh ep a rd , 1 2 5 S . C t. a t 1 2 6 3 . W e h a v e d ir e c tly a d d r e s s e d th is is s u e , a n d th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t e r rin f i ndi ng ba tt e r y on a l a w e nf or c e m e ntof

f i c e runde rF l or i da l a w i s a c r i m e of v io le n c e . C o n tr a r y to W a lk e r ’s c o n te n tio n s , Sh ep a rd d o e s n o t a lte rth is concl usi on , as i tm er el y l i m i t ed the types of evi dence a di stri ctcourtm ay consi der i n de t e r m i ni ng the na tur e of a pr i orc onvi c t i on. U nl i ke i n Sh ep a rd , the di stri ct c our ti n thi s c a s e ha d t o l ook no f ur the rtha n the f

a c tof c onvi c t i on t o de t e r m i ne W a lk e rw a s a c a r e e ro f

f e n d e r . F u r th e r , to th e e x te n t W a lk e ra r g u e s w e s h o u ld o v e r ru le o u rp r io rd e c is io n , th is a r g u m e n t is w ith o u t m e r it. See Sw a n n v. So u th ern H eal th P artners , Inc. , 38 8 F . 3d 83 4, 83 7 (11 th C i r. 20 04 ) ( “ U nd erthe pri or panel rul e , [ a pa ne l of

thi s C our ti s ] bound by the hol di ngs of e a r l i e rpa ne l s unl e s s a ndUnited States v. Book er , 125 S. Ct . 738 (2005). 1 4 un t i l they c l ea rl y overturned en b anc or by the S up re m e C ou rt . ” ) . T he di stri ct c our tdi d note r ri n f

i ndi ng W a l ke r ’ s pr i orc onvi c t i on qua l i f i e d a s a c r i m e of vi ol ence for purpo se s of c l as si fy i ng hi m as a c ar ee r off ender. B . E nhanc e m e nt

B as e d on P r i orC onv i c t i on W a l ke ra l s o a r gue s hi s pr i orc onvi c t i on f orba tt e r y on a l a w e nf

or c e m e nt offi ce r s ho ul d n otbe used as a pre di ca t e off ense for c ar ee r off

ender purpo se s s i nce the pr i orc onvi c t i on w a s notpr ove n t o a j ur y be y ond a r e a s ona bl e doubtnor a dm i tt e d by hi m i n hi s pl e a . W a l ke ra c know l e dge s the bi ndi ng pr e c e de ntof A lm enda rez- T

orre s v . U

ni t ed Stat es , 11 8 S . C t . 12 19 (199 8), bu tcont ends that Sh ep a rd , a s r e c ogni z e d by r e c e ntde c i s i ons of thi s C our t , ha s c a s tdoubton the val i di ty of A lm enda rez- T orre s a n d h a s lim ite d th e u s e o f p r io rc o n v ic tio n s to enhance a def

endant ’ s s ent ence . I n A lm enda rez- T

orre s , the S upr e m e C our the l d a de f e nda nt ’ s pr i or c onvi c t i on doe s notha ve t o be a l l e ge d i n the i ndi c tm e ntors ubm i tt e d t o a j ur y a nd p r o v e d b e y o n d a r e a s o n a b le d o u b t. A lm enda rez- T orre s , 118 S . C t . 1219, 1222 ( 1998) . W e ha ve he l d nothi ng i n B oo ke r di s turbe d the S upr e m e C our t ’ s hol di ng 1 i n A lm enda rez- T

orre s . See U

ni t e d Stat e s v . G i bs on , 4 3 4 F .3 d 1 2 3 4 , 1 2 4 4 - 4 7 ( 1 1 th C i r. 20 06 ). A dd i t i on al l y, si nce Sh ep a rd , w e ha ve c ons i s t e nt l y he l d A lm en da rez-5

T orre s r e m a in s g o o d la w “u n til th e S u p r e m e C o u r t d e te r m in e s th a t A lm en da rezT orre s i s notcont rol l i ng prec edent . ” U ni t ed Stat es v. O rdun o-Mi re l es , 405 F . 3d 9 6 0 , 9 6 3 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , ce rt. deni ed , 1 2 6 S . C t. 2 3 3 ( 2 0 0 5 ) ; s ee a l so U ni t ed Stat es v. C am acho -I

ba rquen , 4 1 0 F .3 d 1 3 0 7 , 1 3 1 6 n .3 ( 1 1 th C ir .) , ce rt. deni ed , 1 2 6 S . C t. 457 ( 2005) ( “ A l though r e c e ntde c i s i ons , i nc l udi ng Sh ep a rd . . . , m ay arg u ab l y cast do ub ton the future prospect s of A lm enda rez- T orre s ’ s hol di ng r e ga r di ng pr i or c onvi c t i ons , the S upr e m e C our tha s note xpl i c i t l y ove r rul e d A lm enda rez- T orre s . As a r e s u l t , we m u s tf

o l l o w A lm enda rez- T

orre s . ”) . F urther, w e have hel d thataf t er Sh ep a rd , di stri ctcourt s m ay det erm i ne bo th the exi st ence and n ature of a conv i ct i on , as “ [t ] here i s i m pl i ci ti n the Sh ep a rd rul e . . . a r e c ogni t i on tha ti f the na tur e of the pr i orc onvi c t i on c a n be de t e r m i ne d f r om [ the s t a tut or y de f

i ni t i on, char gi ng do cum ent , w ri tt en pl eaagre em ent , tra nscr i ptof pl eacol l oq uy, or j ury i nstruct i on s] , un der e xi st i ng l aw the tri al j ud ge m ay m ake the det erm i nat i on . ” U ni t ed Stat es v. G re er , 44 0 F . 3d 12 67 , 12 75 (11t h C i r. 20 06 ). T h e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t e r rb y e n h a n c in g W a lk e r ’s s e n te n c e b a s e d o n h is p r io rc o n v ic tio n . W e h a v e d e c id e d th is q u e s tio n p r e v io u s ly a n d e x p r e s s ly h e ld A lm enda rez- T

orre s r e m a i ns good l a w . A l s o, W a l ke r ’ s c ont e nt i on the f i ndi ng re gardi ng hi s pri or conv i ct i on for batt ery on a l aw enforce m entoffi ce r vi ol at ed6

Sh ep a rd is w ith o u t m e r it. T h e s e n te n c in g ju d g e c o n tin u e s to m a k e th is de t e r m i na t i on, a nd i s onl y l i m i t e d i n the e vi de nc e he m a y us e t o m a ke thi s f i ndi ng. I I . C ON C L US I ON T he di s tr i c tc our tdi d note r ri n de t e r m i ni ng ba tt e r y on a l a w e nf or c e m e nt of f i c e ri s a c r i m e of

vi ol e nc e ori n e nha nc i ng W a l ke r ’ s s e nt e nc e ba s e d on hi s pr i or c o n v i c t i o n . A c c o r d i n g l y , w e a f f i r m. AF F I RME D.