Opinion ID: 2821968
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: facts

Text: On August 6, 2014, Joseph Kemmerling pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). [R. 20, Page ID # 21] A Presentence Investigation  The Honorable Danny C. Reeves, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Kentucky, sitting by designation. No. 15-5092, United States v. Kemmerling Report (“PSR”) was prepared in connection with his sentencing hearing. The PSR classified Kemmerling as an armed career criminal based on his prior convictions for three “violent felonies,” which included a 1999 conviction for robbery under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-401 and two 2005 convictions for aggravated burglary under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-403. [PSR, pp. 9, 11–12] During the sentencing hearing, the district court determined that Kemmerling had a Total Offense Level of 30 and a Criminal History Category of VI, resulting in a non-binding guideline range for imprisonment of 168 to 210 months. [R. 32, Page ID # 82] However, his classification as an armed career criminal subjected Kemmerling to a mandatory-minimum term of imprisonment of 180 months under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1), creating a restricted guideline range of 180 to 210 months. [Id.] This court has previously determined that convictions under Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14403 qualify under the ACCA’s “enumerated offenses” clause in 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). United States v. Nance, 481 F.3d 882, 887–88 (6th Cir. 2007). As a result, Kemmerling did not object to the designation of his two 2005 aggravated-burglary convictions as predicate offenses under the ACCA. However, he challenged his classification as an armed career criminal, arguing that his 1999 robbery conviction did not qualify as a “violent felony.” [R. 27, Page ID # 36; R. 32, Page ID # 55–57] The district court disagreed and sentenced Kemmerling to the mandatory-minimum term of imprisonment of 180 months. [R. 31, Page ID # 45–46; R. 32, Page ID # 71, 84] -2- No. 15-5092, United States v. Kemmerling