FI L ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTH CI RCUI T FEB RUARY 27, 2012 J OHN L EY CL ERK [PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 9- 13 11 8

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D. C. Dock etNo. 0 7- 00 12 4- CR-S UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee,
ve rs us CHRIS TOPHER DWAYNE OW ENS, Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof Al ab am a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Feb ru ary 27 , 20 12 ) ON REMAND FROM THE S UPREME COURT

OF THE UNITE D STATES Befo re DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e, COX, Cir cu itJu dg e, an d GOLDBERG, Ju dg e. *

Honora ble Richard W. Goldberg , United States Court of Interna tional Trade J udg e, sitti ng * by desig nation.DUBINA, Ch ie f Ju dg e:

In th is cas e we are cal le d upo n t o d et erm in e if co nv ic ti on s fo r se co ndde gr ee rap e an d s eco ndde gr ee s od omy un de r Alaba m a la w are v io le ntfel on ie s u nd er t he Arm edCare er Cr im in al Act (“ ACCA”) , 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e), as de fin edby the Supr em e Co ur t i n Jo hn so n v . Uni te d Sta te s , __ _ U.S. _

__ , 13 0 S . Ct. 1 26 5 (2 01 0)
. W e co nc lu de th atne it he r of fen se qu al ifi es as a vi ol en t fe lo ny. Acco rd in gl y , we
va cat e App el la nt Ch ris to ph er Dwayne Owens ’s sen te nc e an d re m an d t o t he di st ric t
co ur t fo r res en te nc in g. I. BACKG ROUND A gra ndjury in th e Mi dd le Dis tri ctof Al ab am a in di ct edOwens on on e
co un t o f vi ol at in g 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 2( g) (1 ) fo r be in g afel on in po ss es si on of a fir earm . Owens ori gi na ll y pl edno t g ui lt y , bu t l at er ch an ge d h is pl ea t o g ui lt y . The go ve rn m en t d idno t en te r in to a pl ea ag reem en t wi th Owens . The fel on in po ss es si on off

en se carr ie d am ax im

um ten y ear s en te nc e o f im

pr is on m en t. The di st ric t co ur t d et erm in edth atOwens qu al ifi edas a n a rm edcare er cr im in al pu rs ua nt to 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e) b ecau se he po ss es se d afir earm aft er h av in g b een
co nv ic te d o f atlea stth ree v io le nt fel on ie s. Th e d is tri ctco ur t fo un d t ha t Owen s’s pr io r co nv ic ti on s fo r rap e in th e se co ndde gr ee an d s od omy in th e se co ndde gr ee
un de r Alaba m a la w qu al ifi edhi m forth e ACCA en ha nc em en t. Hen ce, Owen s was
2su bjec t t o am an da to ry m in im um sen te nc e o f 15 y ears im

pr is on m en t t o a
m ax im um of l ife im pr is on m en t. Se e 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e)( 1) . After app lying th e ACCA en ha nc em en t, t he di st ric t co ur t fo un d t he ad vi so ry sen te nc in g g ui de li ne s
ran ge to be 23 5 t o 2 93 m on th s an d, ac co rd in gl y , sen te nc edOwens to a te rm of 2 93
m on th s’ im

pr is on m en t. On ap pe al , th is co ur t af

fir m edOwens ’s sen te nc e, rel y in g o n o urpre ced en t in Uni te d S ta te s v. Iv or

y , 47 5 F .3d12 32 (11 th Cir . 20 07 ) (p er cu ria m). Se e Uni te d St at es v. Owen s , 36 3 F . App ’x 69 6, 6 97 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ) (p er cu ria m ). The Supr em e Co ur t g ran te d Owen s’s p et it io n fo r a wri t o f cer ti or ar i , vac at edth e jud gm en t, an d re m an de d t o t hi s co ur t fo r rec on si de rat io n i n l ig ht of i ts de ci si on in Jo hn so n . Se e Owen s v. Un it ed St at es , __

_ U.S. _

__ , 13 1 S . Ct. 6 38 (20 10 ). II . STANDARD OF REVIEW Thi s co ur t re vi ews de no vo a di st ric t co ur t’s d et erm in at io n t ha t a p art ic ul ar
co nv ic ti on is a “ vi ol en t fe lo ny” with in th e m ean in g o f th e ACCA. Uni te d S ta te s v. Ca nt y , 57 0 F .3d12 51 , 12 54 –5 5 (1 1t h C ir. 2 00 9) , cer t. d en ie d , __ _ U.S. _

__ , 13 2 S. Ct . 53 2 (2 01 1)
. II I. DI SCUSSI ON A. Vio le nt

Felo ny un de r t he ACCA

3The ACCA p ro vi de s fo r a m an da to ry m in im um 15 y ear p ris on sen te nc e fo r
an y co nv ic te d fe lo n wh o p os se ss es a fi rear m or a m m un it io n a fte r ha vi ng be en
co nv ic te d o f th ree v io le ntfel on ie s o r se rio us dru g o ffen se s. 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(1 ). A vi ol en t fe lo ny is d efi ne d a s an y fel on y whi ch “ ha s as an ele m en t t he
us e, at te m

pt edus e, orth reat en edus e o f ph y si cal for ce ag ai ns t t he pe rs on of
an ot he r; o r is bu rg la ry , ars on , or e xt or ti on ,” or“ in vo lv es us e o f ex pl os iv es , or ot he rwis e in vo lv es co nd uc t t ha t p res en ts a se rio us po te nt ia l ri skof p hysic al in jury to an ot he r.” Id

. at § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) . The co urt fi rs t ex am in es whet he r th e o ffen se is
a v io le nt fel on y

un de r th e el em en ts cla us e, whi ch pro vi de s t ha t t he off en se ha s as
an ele m en t t he us e o f ph y si cal for ce; sec on d, wh et he r th e o ffen se is on e o f th e
en um erat edcri m es ; an d t hi rd , whet he r it is an off en se un de r th e res idua l cl au se . Whe n a na lyzin g a n o ffen se un de r th e res idua l cl au se , cou rts ut il iz e a ca te go ric al ap pr oa ch : “ ex am in e [t he off en se ] in ter m s o f ho w th e la w def in es th e o ffen se an d
no t i n t erm s o f ho w an i nd iv idua l o ffen de r m ig ht ha ve co m m it te d i t o n apa rti cu la r
oc cas io n.” Uni te d S ta tes v. Ha rr is , 60 8 F .3d12 22 , 12 32 (11 th Cir . 20 10 ) (q uo ti ng Beg ayv. Uni te d S ta te s , 55 3 U.S. 1 37 , 14 1, 1 28 S. Ct. 1 58 1, 1 58 4 (2 00 8) ). In o th er
wor ds , we lo okat t he rel ev an t s ta tu te to di sc ern th e cri m e as itis ord in ari ly
co m m it te d a ndco ns id er wh et he r th e cri m e p os es a “ se rio us po te nt ia l ri skof ph y si cal in

jury” tha t i s s im il ar i n k in d a ndin de gr ee t o t he ris ks po se d b y th e
4en um erat edcri m es . Beg ay , 55 3 U.S. at14 2, 1 28 S. Ct. at 15 85 . Fin al ly, we as k

whe th er t he co nd uc t at is su e in th e st atut ory off en se is “pu rp os efu l, v io le nt an d ag gr es si ve .” Id

. at 1 44 –4 5, 1 28 S. Ct. at 15 86
. B. Ala ba ma Co nv ic ti on s Owens ha s t en co nv ic ti on s fo r rap e in th e se co ndde gr ee an d t wo
co nv ic ti on s fo r so do m

y in th e se co ndde gr ee, al l u nd er Al ab am a la w. Seco nd de gr ee rape is a vi ol at io n o f Alaba m a Co de § 1 3A- 6- 62 , whi ch m ak es ita Cl as s B fel on y fora pe rs on who is 16 y ears ol d o r ol de r to en ga ge in sex ua l i nt erco ur se wit h am em

be r of th e o pp os it e se x wh o i s l es s t ha n 1 6 years o ldan d m or e th an 12 y ears ol d, s o l on g a s t he off en de r is two y ears ol de r th an th e v ic ti m . Ala. Co de § 13 A-6 -6 2 (1 97 5) . “ Sex ua l i nt erco ur se ” is de fin edas h av in g “ it s o rd in ary m ean in g
an d o ccu rs up on an y

pe ne tra ti on , ho wev er s li gh t; em is si on is no t re qu ire d.” Id

. § 13 A-6 -6 0( 1) . Seco ndde gr ee s od omy is a Cl as s B fel on y

fora pe rs on who is 16 y ears or o ld er an d e ng ag es in de vi at e se xu al in te rco ur se wit h a no th er p ers on les s th an 16 y ears an d m or e th an 12 y ears ol d. Id

. § 1 3A- 6- 64 . “ Dev ia te sex ua l in te rco ur se ” is de fin edas “ [a]ny actof s ex ua l g rat ifi cat io n b et ween pe rs on s n ot
m arri edto each ot he r in vo lv in g t he sex org an s o f on e p ers on an d t he m ou th or
an us of a no th er.” Id

. § 1 3A- 6- 60 (2 ). A pers on y ou ng er tha n 1 6 years o ldis

5le ga ll y

de em edin cap ab le of c on se nt in g t o s ex ua l i nt erco ur se un de r Alaba m a la w. Id

. § 1 3A- 6- 70 (c)( 1)
. C. Dis tr ic t Co ur t At Owen s’s s en te nc in g h eari ng , th e d is tri ctco ur t, re lying on ou r Ivo ry de ci si on , det erm in edth atOwens ’s ten co nv ic ti on s fo r rap e in th e se co ndde gr ee
an d h is two co nv ic ti on s fo r so do m y in th e se co ndde gr ee q ua li fy as v io le nt fel on ie s u nd er t he ACCA. In Ivo ry , we exa m in edwhet he r a v io la ti on of Alab am a’s se co ndde gr ee rape st atut e was a “ cri m e o f vi ol en ce” u nd er t he
se nt en ci ng gu id el in es be cau se itin vo lv ed“ th e u se , att em pt edus e, orth reat en ed
us e o f ph y si cal for ce ag ai ns t t he pe rs on of a no th er[.]” Ivo ry , 47 5 F .3dat 1 23 4 (quo ti ng U.S.S.G. § 4 B1 .2(a )(1 )). W e ex pl ai ne d t ha t “ th e p la in m ean in g o f 1 ‘physic al for ce’ is po wer, v io le nc e, orpre ss ur e d ire ct edag ai ns t a p ers on
co ns is ti ng in a ph y si cal act .” Id

. at 1 23 5. In in te rp ret in g t he ter m “ph y si cal for ce” in th e g ui de li ne s p ro vi si on , we no te d t ha t “ a p ers on can no t en ga ge in
no nc on se ns ua l s ex ua l p en et rat io n wi th an ot he r wit ho ut ex ert in g s om e le ve l o f ph y si cal for ce.” Id

. Beca us e u nd er Al ab am a la w sec on d d eg ree r ap e is sex ua l in te rco ur se wit h ape rs on in cap ab le of c on se nt in g t o t he act , we con cl ud ed“ th ata

The Supreme Court has noted that the sentenc ing guidelines definition of “cr ime of 1 violence” closely trac ks the ACCA’s definition of “violent felony .” Jame s v. United States , 550 U.S. 192, 206, 127 S. Ct . 1586, 1596 (2007). 6se co ndde gr ee rape co nv ic ti on un de r Alaba m a la w m us t i nv ol ve th e u se of ph y si cal for ce ag ai ns t t he pe rs on of a no th er.” Id

. at 1 23 6 (i nt ern al qu ot at io n
m ark s o m it te d)
. As an alt ern at iv e an d i nd ep en de nt ba si s fo r ou r ho ld in g, we co nc lu de d t ha t
se co ndde gr ee rape of a m in orun de r Alaba m a la w, at a m in im um , “pr es en ts a
se rio us po te nt ia l ri skof p hysic al in jury to an ot he r,” as pro vi de d i n § 4B 1.2 (a)( 2) of th e se nt en ci ng gu id el in es (th e res idua l cl au se ). Id

. ; Cf . Uni te d S ta te s v. Rut he rf or d , 17 5 F .3d89 9, 9 05 (11 th Cir . 19 99 ) (h ol di ng th ata co nv ic ti on forlewd
as sa ul t ag ai ns t a m in orin vo lv es “ a se rio us po te nt ia l ri skof p hysic al in jury” and
co ns ti tu te s a c rime of v io le nc e u nd er U.S.S.G. § 4 B1 .2(a )(2 )). Thi s co ur t re as on ed th at“ th e co m

m is si on of s eco ndde gr ee rape by a no nc on se ns ua l ac t o f se xu al pe ne tra ti on po se s an ev en gre at er ri skof b ot h p hysic al for ce an d p hysic al in jury” th an a le wd as sa ul t b ecau se “ a p ers on can no t en ga ge in no nc on se ns ua l s ex ua l pe ne tra ti on wit h a no th er wi th ou t ex ert in g s om e le ve l o f ph y si cal for ce.” Ivo ry , 47 5 F .3dat 1 23 8, 1 23 5. Th eref or e, th is co ur t h el d t ha t t he off en se of s eco nd de gr ee rape un de r Alaba m a la w “ in he ren tl y po se s a s eri ou s p ot en ti al ris k o f ph y si cal in

jury to an ot he r,” an d q ua li fie s as a cri m e o f vi ol en ce u nd er the
se nt en ci ng gu id el in es . Id at 1 23 8. D. Jo hn so n Dec is io n
7In Jo hn so n , th e Supr em e Co ur t ex am in eda ba tt ery of fen se un de r Fl or id a la w, whi ch oc cu rs when a pe rs on eit he r act ua ll y an d i nt en ti on al ly tou ch es an ot he r pe rs on ag ai ns t h is wil l o r “ in te nt io na ll y cau se s b od il y

ha rm to an ot he r pe rs on ,” Fl a. St at . § 7 84 .03 , to de te rm in e if th e o ffen se qu al ifi es as a vi ol en t fe lo ny un de r th e ACCA. Jo hn so n , __

_ U.S. at__

_, 1 30 S. Ct. at12 68 –6 9. Th e Co ur t l oo ke d t o th e Fl or id a Supr em e Co ur t’s d et erm in at io n o f th e el em en ts of a ba tt ery of fen se an d
no te d t ha t b at te ry

un de r Fl or id a la w is sat is fie d b y an y in te nt io na l p hysic al
co nt act , “ no m at te r ho w sl ig ht .” Id

. at 1 26 9– 70 (qu ot in g St at e v. Hea rn s , 96 1 S o. 2d21 1, 2 18 (Fl a. 20 07 )). The Co ur t ap pl ie d t he su bs ta nt iv e el em en ts of t he cri m in al off

en se in de te rm in in g wh et he r a fel on y co nv ic ti on forba tt ery un de r Fl or id a “ ha s as an ele m en t t he us e, at te m pt edus e, or

th reat en edus e o f ph y si cal fo rce,” § 9 24 (e)( 2) (B)( i), t o q ua li fy un de r th e ACCA. Id

. The Co ur t n ot edth atth e que st io n o f wha t co ns ti tu te s “ ph y si cal for ce” a s
us edin th e ACCA i s a q ue st io n o f fed eral law. Id

. at 1 26 9. Th e ACCA d oe s n ot de fin e “ ph y si cal for ce,” a ndth e Co ur t s ta te d t ha t i n g en eral pa rla nc e, th e wor d
m ean s “ st ren gt h o r en erg y ; ac ti ve po wer; vi go r; o fte n a n u nu su al de gr ee o f st ren gt h o r en erg y .” Id . at 1 27 0 (i nt ern al qu ot at io n m ark s an d a lt erat io n o m it te d)
. Not in g t ha t t he de fin it io n o f “ fo rce” in cl ud es “po wer, v io le nc e, orpre ss ur e di rect edag ai ns t a p ers on or t hi ng ,” an d “ ph y si cal for ce” i nc lu de s “ fo rce c on si st in g
8in a ph y si cal act ,” th e Co ur t fo un d t ha t al l t he de fin it io ns “ su gg es t a d eg ree o f

po wer t ha t wo ul d n ot be sat is fie d b y th e m eres t t ou ch in g.” Id

. (qu ot in g B la ck ’s Law Dict io na ry

71 7 (9 th ed . 20 09 )). Fu rth er, t he Co ur t re jecte d t he est ab li sh ed
co m m on -la w m ean in g o f “ fo rce,” whi ch in cl ud edev en th e sl ig ht es t o ffen si ve to uc hi ng , bec au se it s m ean in g d idno t fi t t he st atut ory co nt ex t. Id

. The Co ur t re as on edth atbe cau se “ co nt ex t d et erm in es m ean in g,” th e p hr as e

“ ph y si cal for ce” a s u se d i n t he st atut ory de fin it io n o f vi ol en t fe lo ny “ m ean s vi ol en t fo rce –th atis , for ce capabl e o f cau si ng ph y si cal pa in or i nju ry to an ot he r pe rs on .” Id . at 1 27 0– 71 . The wo rd“ vi ol en t” co nn ot es “ a su bs ta nt ia l d eg ree o f fo rce,” an d th e im pl ic at io n o f “ st ro ng ph y si cal for ce” i s m ad e ev enm or e p el lu ci d b y it s at ta ch m en t t o t he word“ fel on y .” Id

. at 1 27 1. “ [T]he te rm ‘ ph y si cal for ce’ it se lf
no rm al ly con no te s fo rce s tro ng en ou gh to co ns ti tu te ‘ po wer’–an d a ll th e m or e so whe n i t i s co nt ai ne d i n ade fin it io n o f ‘vio le ntfel on y .’ ” Id

. at 1 27 2. Th us , th e Co ur t co nc lu de d t ha t b at te ry un de r Fl or id a la w di d n ot sat is fy th e d efi ni ti on of

“ vi ol en t fe lo ny” in 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e)( 2) (B)( i). Id

. at 1 27 0– 73
. 2 E. App li ca ti on

The Court did n o t d i s cu s s whether the Florida battery offe nse satis fied the ACCA under 2 subsection (ii) beca

use the g overnme nt did not ar gue that the offe nse qualified under the residual clause
. Id
. at 1272, 1274. See also United States v. Oner , 382 F. App’x 893, 896 n.4 (11th Cir. 2010) (statingthat Johnson has no impact on the r esidual cla use of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e) (2)( B) (ii)). 9F o r th is co ur t to up ho ld Owens ’s se nt en ce, we wou ld ha ve to co nc lu de t h a t

Ivo ry ’s ho ld in g— th at Alab am a’s se co nd de gr ee r a pe st atut e “ in he ren tl y po se s a
se rio us po te nt ia l ris k of ph y si cal in jury to an ot he r” an d co ns eque nt ly “ qu al ifi es as a cri m e of vi ol en ce un de r § 4B 1.2 (a)( 2) ”—c om po r t s w i t h th e Jo hn so n Co urt’s de fin it io n of “ vi ol en t fel on y ” un de r th e ACCA. W e wou ld be in te ll ect ua ll y di sh on es t i f we de ci de d th at in th e affi rm at iv e. As th e Co ur t st at ed in Jo hn so n , a cr i me mu s t ha ve as an el em en t th e us e of ph y si cal fo rce ag ai n s t t h e p e r s on of an ot he r an d th at ph y si cal fo rce in th e co nt ex t of th e ACCA m ean s vi ol en t fo rce. Jo hn so n , 13 0 S. Ct
. at12 71
. The Alab am a se co nd de gr ee rap e st atut e an d th e se co nd de gr ee so do m y st atut e do no t req ui re, as an el em en t, th e us e of vi ol en t ph y si cal fo rce ag ai ns t th e vi ct im , as
ev id en ce d b y th e st atut e’s us e of th e wor ds “ fo rci bl e co m pu ls io n” in bo th th e fir st de gr ee rap e st atut e an d th e fir st de gr ee so do m y st atut e. Se e Ala. Co de §§ 13 A-6 -6 1, 13 A-6 -6 3; se e al

so Bea ver

s v. St at e , 51 1 So
. 2d 95 1, 9 5 4 ( A la
. Cri m . App
. 19 87 ) ( st at in g th at th e ap pe ll an t was ch arg ed wit h “ fo rci bl e co m pu ls io n” bu t if “ th e jury
co nc lu de d th at no fo rci bl e co m pu ls io n ex is te d th en , un de r th e ev ide nce, it wou ld ha ve be en au th or iz ed to co nv ic t th e ap pe ll an t of se co nd de gr ee rap e”); R.W .L. v. St at e , 70 6 So
. 2d 13 14 , 13 16 n.2 (Ala
. Cri m . App
. 19 97 ) (n ot in g th at “ so do m y in th e fir st de gr ee
r e qu ire s pr oo f th at th e vi ct im is le ss th an 12 y ears ol d
. . . o r [was ] su bjec te d t o t h e
10act by fo rci bl e co m pu ls io n” ). On th e co nt rary, th e se co nd de gr ee rap e st atut e req ui res th e act of se xu al in te rco u r s e, whi ch requi res on ly sl ig ht pe ne tra ti on , wit h a no nco ns en ti ng vi ct im , du e to ag e or m en ta l in cap aci ty. Se e Ala. Cod e §§ 13 A-6 -6 0( 1) , 1 3 A
- 6
- 6 2
. Alt ho ug h th is act req ui res ph y si cal co nt act , it do es no t req ui re, as an el em en t, st ro ng ph y si cal fo rce or a su bs ta nt ia l de gr ee of fo rce. Se e Jo hn so n ,

__ _ U.S. at__ _,1 30 S. Ct. at 12 65
. Thu s ou r pr on ou nc em en t in Ivo ry th at th e ex ert io n of “ at le as t so m e le ve l” of ph y si cal fo rce is en ou gh to r e n d e r s e co nd de gr ee rap e a vi ol en t fel on y un de r th e ACCA, Ivo ry , 4 75 F.3 d at 12 36 , i s to o br oa d an d is ou t of sync wit h Jo hn so n . Th e ki nd of ph y si cal fo rce req ui red fo r a qu a l i f y in g vi ol en t fel on y un de r th e ACCA is
no t sa ti sf ie d by th e m eres t to uc hi ng , or in th is cas e, th e sl ig ht es t pe ne tra ti on . Se e Jo hn so n ,

__

_ U.S. at

__

_,1 30 S. Ct
. a t 12 70
. To be co nv ic te d un de r th e se co nd de gr ee rap e st atut e, th e go ve rn m en t ne ed on ly sh ow th at th e of fen de r is 16 y ears ol d
or ol de r an d eng ag ed in sex ua l i nt erco ur se wit h ape rs on of t he op po si te se x who is be twee n th e ag es of 12 an d 16 , wi th ou t le ga l cap aci ty t o co ns e n t
. Se e A l a . Co de § 13 A-6 -6 2. The go ve r n men t i s n ot req ui red to sh ow fo rci bl e co m pu ls io n as an el em en t t o p r o v e se co nd de gr ee rap e. Se e id

. The sa m e ap pl ie s wit h th e se co nd de gr ee so do m

y of fen se . Se e Ala. Co de § 13 A-6 -6 4. Vio le nt fo rce is no t an el em en t of ei t h e r of

fen se . Thu s, aft er ex am in in g th e el em en ts of th e Alab am a of fen se s of
11se co nd de gr ee rap e an d se co nd de gr ee so do m y an d ap pl y in g th e Jo hn so n Co urt’s de fin it io n of ph y si cal for ce as st at edin th e ACCA, 1 8 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) (i) , we ho ld th at ne it he r of

fen se ha s as a n e l e men t th e vi ol en t ph y si cal fo rce ne ces sa ry to qu al ify as a v io le nt fel on y un de r th e ACCA. Fu rth erm or e, itis ob vi ou s t ha t n ei th er o ffen se is am on g t he sp eci fic off en se s li st ed in cl au se (ii ). Thu s, we are le ft wit h a de te rm in at io n of whe th er th e se co nd de gr ee rap e an d se co nd de gr ee so do m y of fen se s qu al ify as vi ol en t fel on ie s un de r th e
res idua l cl au se co nt ai ne d in § 92 4( e)(2 )(B) (ii ), whi ch de fin es ‘vio le nt fel on y ” as an of fen se th at “ ot he rwis e in vo lv es co nd uc t th at pr es en ts a s e r i o u s p ot en ti al ris k of ph y si cal in

jury to an ot he r.” 18 U.S.C. § 9 2 4 ( e)(2 )(B) (ii ). The qu es ti on is whe th er Alab am a’s se co nd de gr ee rap e an d se co nd de gr ee so do m y of fen se s fal l wit hi n th is pr ov is io n be cau se , as a cat eg or ic al m at t er, th ey pr es en t a se rio us po te nt ia l ris k of ph y si cal in

jury to an ot he r. Sy ke s v . U ni te d St at es ,

__

_ U.S.

__ _, 13 1 S. Ct
. 22 67 , 22 73 (2 01 1)
. “ Fo r in st an ce , a cri m e in vo lv es th e req ui si te ris k [o f ph y si cal in jury] whe n ‘the ris k po se d by th e c r i me i n q ue st io n is co m pa rab le to th at po se d by it s cl os es t an al og am on g th e en um erat ed of fen se s.’” Id

. (quo ti ng Ja mes v. Uni te d St at es , 55 0 U.S. 1 92 , 20 3, 1 27 S. Ct. 1 58 6, 1 59 4 (2 00 7) ). Eve n co nc ed in g th at th es e of fen se s m eet o n e p a r t of th e te st of th e res idua l cl au se be cau se th ey po se a se rio us po te nt ia l ris k of ph y si cal in jury to th e vi ct im , we
12can no t co nc lu de th at th e of fen se s m eet th e ot he r pa rt of th e te st
. The se of fen se s are
no t “ ro ug hl y si m il ar, in ki nd as well as in de gr ee of r i s k po se d” to bu rg la ry , ars on , ex to rti on , a nd cri m es in vo lv in g t h e us e of ex pl os iv es . Se e Beg ay , 5 53 U.S. a t 14 3, 12 8 S
. Ct
. at 15 85
. The Beg ay Co ur t st at ed th at th es e en um erat ed cri m es are

“ as so ci at ed wit h a li ke li ho o d of fu tu re vi ol en t, ag gr es si ve , an d pu rp os efu l ‘arm ed
care er cri m in al ’ be ha vi or in a way th at [ s t r i c t l i a bi li ty cri m es ] are no t.” Id

. at 14 8, 12 8 S . Ct. at 15 88
. The se co nd de gr ee rap e st atut e un de r Alab ama l a w supp la nt s an d is

“ su bs ta nt ia ll y th e sa m e” as th e fo rm er st atut ory rap e of fen se . Se e Ala. Co de § 13 A-6
- 62 , cmts . It is a st ric t l iabi li ty offen se be cau se it co nt ai ns no men s re a req ui rem en t
an d con se nt is no t a de fen se . Se e id

. Co ns en t is al so no t a de fen se to th e of fen se of
se co nd de gr ee so do m

y . Se e Ala. Co d e § 1 3 A
- 6- 64 , cmts . Bec au se th es e of fen se s
un de r Alab am a la w i m

po se st ric t li ab il it y , we can no t ho ld th at a v i o l at io n of ei th er of th em in vo lv es “pu rp os efu l, vi ol en t, an d ag gr es si ve co nd uc t.” Begay , 55 3 U.S. at 14 4– 45 , 12 8 S. Ct
. at 15 86
. Se e al so Har ri s , 6 0 8 F
. 3 d a t 12 33 (fi nd in g Fl or id a’s
se xu al ba tt ery st atut e is no t a cri m e of vi ol en ce un de r th e A C C A )
. Acco rd in gl y , ne it he r se co nd de gr ee rap e no r se co nd de gr ee so do m y un de r Alab am a la w qu al ifi es
as a vi ol en t fel on y un de r th e res idua l c l a u s e o f th e ACCA be cau se th ey are no t

“ si m il ar, in ki nd as well as in de gr ee of ris k po se d” to bu rg la ry , ars on , ex to rti on , an d
13cri m es in vo lv in g th e us e of ex pl os iv es . Beg ay , 55 3 U.S. at 14 3, 12 8 S. Ct
. at 15 85 ;

18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e)( 2) (B)( ii ). IV. CONCLUSI ON The di st ric t co ur t erre d in en ha nc in g Owens ’s se nt en ce un de r th e ACCA. The st at e co nv ic ti on s fo r rap e in th e se co nd de gr ee an d so do m y in th e se co nd de gr ee are
no t vi ol en t fel on ie s un de r th e el em en ts cl au se of 18 U.S.C. § 92 4( e)(2 )(b )(i ) be cau se th ey do no t ha ve as an el em en t th e us e of vi ol en t ph y si cal fo rce. The of fen se s are al so
no t vi ol en t fel on ie s un de r th e res idua l cl au se of th e ACCA be cau se , un de r th e cat eg or ic al ap pr oa ch , th ey im po se st ric t li ab il it y , an d we can no t say th at a vi ol at io n of ei th er typic al ly in vo lv es “ pu rp os efu l, v i ol en t, an d ag gr es si ve co nd uc t.” Beg ay , 55 3 U.S. a t 14 4– 45 , 1 28 S. Ct . a t 15 86
. Acco rd in gl y, we va cat e Owens ’s s en te nc e
an d re m an d t hi s ca se to th e d is tri ctco ur t fo r res en te nc in g. VACATED an d REMANDED
.

14