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

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 5- 34 86

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ 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.
Jo hn Pri ck et t, J r.
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 Ark an sa s - Har ris on

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Apri l 1 1, 2 01 6 Fil ed : J ul y

27 , 20 16 [Pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, BEAM, and SMITH, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Jo hn Pri ck et t, Jr

. sh ot hi s wife m ul ti pl e ti m es whi le cam

pi ng in Bu ffal o Ri ve r Nati on al Park

. Fo rtu na te ly, sh e su rv iv ed

. He co nd it io na ll y pl ead ed gu il ty to as sa ul t wit h i nt en t t o c om m it m

ur de r, a v io la ti on of 1 8 U.S.C. § 11 3( a)(1 ) ("C ou nt I"), an d

us e of a fir earm du rin g a cri m e of v i o l en ce, a vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C.§ 92 4( c)(1 )(A)(i ii ) (Co un t II). Pri ck et t m ov ed to di sm is s Co un t II of th e in di ct m en t,

bu t t he di st ric t co ur t de ni ed hi s m ot io n. We affi rm

. 1

Sect io n 92 4( c)(1 )(A) pr ov id es sp eci fie d m an da to r y mi n im um se nt en ces fo r pe rs on s co nv ic te d of a "cr im e of vi ol en ce" who us e or carr y a fir earm in fu rth eran ce of th at cri m e. Sect io n 9 24 (c)( 3) de fin es "cri m e o f vi ol en ce" as

an off en se th at is a fel on y

an d— (A) ha s as an el em en t th e us e, at te m pt ed us e, or th reat en ed
u s e of ph y si cal fo rce ag ai ns t th e pe rs on or pr op ert y o f
an ot he r, or (B) th at by it s na tu re, i nv ol ve s a su bs ta nt ia l ris k th at ph y si cal fo rce ag ai ns t th e pe rs on o r pr op ert y of an ot he r m ay be us ed in th e co ur se of c om m it ti ng th e o ffen se

.
The di st ric t co ur t fo un d th at Pri ck e t t ' s c o n vi ct io n fo r as sa ul t wit h in te nt to co m m it

m ur de r m et th e de fin it io n of a "cr im e of vi ol en ce" un de r § 92 4( c)(3 )(B)

. Pri ck et t arg ue s th at th e Su pr em e Co ur t's ho ld in g in Jo hn so n v. Uni te d St at es , 13 5 S. Ct

. 25 51 (2 01 5) , ex te nd s to in va li da te § 92 4( c)(3 )(B) as un c o n s ti tu ti on al ly va gu e. If § 92 4( c)(3 )(B) is un co ns ti tu ti on al , Pri ck et t se ek s di sm is sa l of Co un t II. W e rev ie w th e co ns ti tu ti on al it y

of § 924 (c)( 3) (B) de no vo

. Se e Uni te d S ta te s v. S ea y , 62 0 F .3d 91 9, 9 23 (8t h C ir. 2 01 0)

.

In Jo hn so n , th e Su pr em e Co ur t he ld th at th e "re si du al cl au s e " o f th e Arm ed Care er Cri m in al Act (ACC A ) , 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) , "d en ie [d ] fai r no ti ce to de fen da nt s an d in vi te [d ] arb it rary en fo rcem en t by jud ge s." 13 5 S. Ct

. at 25 57

. The po rti on of th e ACCA tha t th e Co ur t fo un d un co ns ti tu ti on al de fin es "v io le nt fel on y "

The Hon or ab le Pau l K. Hol m es , III, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t 1 fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s -2

-to in cl ud e an of fen se th at "o th erwi se in vo lv es co nd uc t th at pr e s e n t s a se rio us po te nt ia l ris k of ph y si cal in jury to an ot h e r

. " Id

. at 25 55 –5 6 (em ph as is om it te d) (q uo ti ng 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) (ii )). The res id ua l cl a u s e of th e ACCA do es
res em bl e th e res id ua l cl au se o f § 9 24 (c)( 3)

. The cl au se s, ho wev er, fu nc ti on in im po rta nt ly diff

eren t co nt ex ts

.
The ACCA's res id ua l cl au se op erat ed on "a jud ic ia ll y im ag in ed 'or di na ry cas e' of a cri m e," Jo hn so n , 13 5 S. Ct

. at 25 57 , whe re a s § 92 4( c)(3 )(B) 's res id ua l cl au se op erat es on "re al -wo rl d f a c t s

. " Se e id

. Thi s di st in ct io n is cri ti cal to th e Jo hn so n Co ur t's ho ld in g. The Jo hn so n Co ur t di d "n ot do ub t th e co ns ti tu ti on al it y of la ws th at cal l fo r th e ap pl ic at io n of a qu al it at iv e st an da rd su ch as 'su bs ta nt ia l ris k' to real -wo rld

co nd uc t." Id

. at 25 61

. Here, § 92 4( c)(3 )(B) do es jus t th at

. The di st ric t c o u rt de te rm in ed whe th er Pri ck et t's act of sh oo t i n g h i s w ife m ul ti pl e ti m es "i nv ol ve [d ] a

su bs t a n t ia l ris k th at ph y si cal fo rce ag ai ns t th e pe rs on or pr op ert y of an ot he r [was ]

us ed in th e co ur se of co mm i tt in g th e of fen se ." Se e 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( c)(3 )(B)

. The di st ric t co ur t di d no t ap pl y § 92 4( c)(3 )(B) 's st an d a r d " t o an id eal iz ed or di na ry cas e of th e cri m e." Se e Jo hn so n , 13 5 S. Ct

. at 25 61

. Sect io n 92 4( c)(3 )(B) is th e ve ry type of st a t ut e th at th e Jo hn so n Co ur t ex pl ai ne d wou ld no t be un co ns ti tu ti on al ly va gu e
un de r it s ho ld in g. A c c o r d i n g l y , th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t err in de nyin g Pri ck et t's

m ot io n t o d is m is s C ou nt II.

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

-3

-