FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P EALS E LEV EN T HC IRC U IT SEPTEMBER 17, 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. 07- 11078 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C . D oc ke tN o. 06- 00196- C R - 001 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 I E R A B B , 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 o rth e So u th e rn D i s tr i c to f A l ab a ma

_________________________ ( S e p t e m b e r 17, 2007) B efo re T JO F L A T , H U L L an d M A R C U S , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: J a m ie L a r e ll R ab b ap p e a ls th e 1 5 1 - m o n th s e n te n c e h e r e c e iv e d f o llo w in g h is g u ilty p le ato k n o w in g ly a n d in te n tio n a lly p o s s e s s i n g w ith th e in te n t to d is tr ib u te c r a c k c oc a i ne i n vi ol a t i on of 21 U . S . C . § 841( a ) ( 1) , a nd be i ng a f e l o n i n p o ssess i on2

of af i r e a rm i n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . § 922( g) ( 1). O n appe a l , R abb a r gue s tha tthe d istri ctcourti ncorrec t l y c l as si fi ed hi s 199 5 con vi ct i on for di sc hargi ng a f i re arm i nt o a dw el l i ng as a c ri m e of v io len ce , for the pu rposes of the ca re eroffe nd er pr ovi s i on of

U . S . S . G . § 4B 1. 1. R ab b b ases thi s a r gum e nton the s t a tut e de f i ni ng hi s off ense , § 1 3A -11-61 (a) o f the A l abam a C od e, and i t s di st i nct i on betw ee n di s c ha r ge s i n oc c upi e d dw e l l i ngs a nd di s c ha r ge s i n unoc c upi e d dw e l l i n gs , f or s e nt e nc i ng purpos e s . W e r e vi e w the pr e l i m i na ry de t e rm i na t i on tha tapr i or conv i ct i on qu al i fi es as a “cri m e of vi ol ence ” de nov o. U ni t ed S t at es v. O rt i zD e l g a d o , 4 5 1 F. 3 d 7 5 2 , 7 5 4 ( 1 1 th Ci r . 2 0 0 6 ) . A f t e rc a r e f u l r e v i e w , w e a f

f i rm. A de f e ndan t i s c l a s s i f

i e d a s ac a r e e rof

f e nde ri f the de f e nda ntw a s a tl e a s t18 years o f ag e atth e t i m e o f th e co m m is s i o n o f th e i n st an to ffen se, th e i n st an to ffen se w as a c ri m e of vi ol ence o r a co ntrol l ed subst ance offe nse, and the defendanthas a t l e a s t tw o pr i or c onvi c t i ons f or c r i m e s of vi ol e nc e or c ontr ol l e d s ubs t a nc e o ffen ses. U . S . S . G . § 4 B 1. 1(a) . S ec t i on 4B 1. 2, in tu rn , d ef i nes the t erm “ cr i m e of vi ol ence ” a s i nc l udi ng, i nt e ra l i a , “ a ny of f e nse p u n i sh abl e by at e rm of i m pr i s onm e nt exce edi ng on e y ea r that. . . i s burgl ary of adw el l i ng , ar son, or ext ort i on , i nv ol ves use of e xp l osi ves, or o th er w is e i nv ol ves c on du ctthatpres ent s ase ri ou s pot ent i al r is k o f p h y s ic a l in

ju ry to a n o th e r .” U .S .S .G . § 4 B 1 .2 ( a ) .3

I n Un i t e d S t a t e s v . M c Gi l l , 4 5 0 F . 3 d 1 2 7 6 , 1 2 8 0 ( 1 1 th C i r . 2 0 0 6 ) , we obs e rve d tha tthe defi n i t i o n o f c onduc ttha tpr e s e nt s “ as e r i ous pot e nt i a l r i s k of p h y s ic a l in

ju ry to a n o t h e r ,” w ith in th e m e a n in g o f § 4 B 1 .2 ( a ) ( 2 ) , is b r o a d ly i nt erpret ed “ t o i ncl ud e c ri m es thatdo no tfi tneat l y i nt o a ca t egory of host i l e, a ggr e s s i ve a c t s . ” W e not e d tha t “ t h e s pe c i f i c l a ngua ge of

§ 4B 1. 2( a ) ( 2) c onc e rns th e p o t en t i al ri sk o f p h ysi cal i n j u ry rath er th an th e actu a l u s e o f fo rce ag ai n st another. . . ” I d. at12 81 . In det erm i ni ng w hether afe l on y i s acr i m e of vi ol ence , for purpo se s of § 4B 1. 2(a) (2), w e nee d con si der onl y w hether the cond uct p r o s c r ib e d c r e a t e s a s u b s ta n tia l r is k o f p h y s ic a l in

ju ry to a n o th e r . I d . a t 1 2 8 2 . W e need no tfi nd a hi gh prob ab il ity of harm t o ano ther pers on , bu tra ther am er e po ss i bi l i ty thatharm t o ano ther pers on coul d o cc ur i s en o u g h un der the G ui del i ne. U ni t e d S t a t e s v. S earcy, 418 F . 3d 1193, 1197 ( 11th C i r . 2005) , c e r t . de ni e d, 126 S .C t. 1 1 0 7 ( 2 0 0 6 ) . T h e A lab am a s tatu te u n d erw h ich R a b b w a s co n v icted p ro v id es th at “[n ]o pers on shal l shoo tor di sc harg e a fi re arm , expl osi ve or other w eapo n w hi ch di s c ha r ge s ada ng ero us pr oj e c t i l e i nt o a ny oc c upi e d orunoc c upi e d dw e l l i ng or bui l di ng orr a i l r oa d l oc om ot i ve orr a i l r oa d c a r , a i r c r a f t , a ut om obi l e, t ruc k or w a te r c r a f

t in th is s ta te .” A la . C o d e § 1 3 A - 1 1 - 6 1 ( a ) ( e m p h a s i s a d d e d ) . T h e s ta tu te m a ke s no di s t i nc t i on be tw e e n oc c upi e d a nd unoc c upi ed d w el l i ngs , f orpurpos e s of4

defi ni ng the cr i m e. A l tho ug h the st atut e goes o n t o m ake the di sc harge i nt o an occupi ed dw el l i ng a C l as s B fe l on y, w hi l e the sa m e acti nt o an u no cc up i ed d w el l i n g i s a C l ass C f el o n y, th e d i st i n ct i o n i s m ad e fo r sen t en ci n g p u rp o ses o n l y. S e e A l a . C ode § 13A - 11- 61. T hus , ade f e nda ntc om m i t s the offen s e pr os c r i be d by § 1 3 A -1 1 -6 1 , w h eth er th e d w el l i n g i s o ccu p i ed o r n o t , an d th e p r o s c r ib e d o ffen se is ac r im e o f

v io le n c e , w ith in th e m e a n in g o f U . S . C . § 4 B 1 .2 ( a ) ( 2 ) , b e c a u s e th e r e is a p o t en t i al ri sk o f p h ysi cal i n j u ry, w h i ch i s th e o n l y sh o w i n g o u r c a s el aw req u i res. W e a r e u n p e r s u a d e d b y a n y o f Rab b ’ s o th e ra r g u me n t s . A c c o r d i n g l y , w e a f f i rm. A F F I R M E D .