Opinion ID: 203601
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Giggey's Appeal

Text: Giggey timely appealed his sentence to this court. On June 10, 2008, we chose to hear this case en banc to address two issues: (1) to reconsider whether to adhere to the court's holding in United States v. Fiore, 983 F.2d 1 (1st Cir.1992), that a conviction under state law for burglary of a commercial structure is to be treated automatically as a crime of violence under the career offender guideline, U.S.S.G. [§ ] 4B1[.2](a)(2); and,(2) if the court does abandon the per se rule adopted in Fiore, to consider what approach should be taken in determining whether, in a particular case, burglary of a commercial structure falls within the residual clause embracing conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another. We invited supplemental briefing on these issues from the parties and amici. The Federal Public Defender for the Districts of Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Rhode Island filed a brief as amicus curiae.