Opinion ID: 196196
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The 1984 Florida Withheld Adjudication

Text: 28 Pierce argues that the district court erred in concluding that the 1984 Florida withheld adjudication in which he had pleaded nolo contendere to delivering cannabis constitutes a cognizable predicate conviction for purposes of the relevant career offender guideline. See U.S.S.G. Sec. 4B1.1. In Pierce's view, a withheld adjudication simply cannot be regarded as a conviction under this guideline because the term conviction necessarily implies the entry of a final adjudicatory judgment. A careful reading of relevant guideline language and commentary persuades us that Pierce's argument is incorrect. 29 Although there is surface appeal to the argument that there can be no conviction unless and until a final adjudicatory judgment is entered, the sentencing guidelines clearly construe the term differently. Section 4B1.2(3), which defines the terms used in Sec. 4B1.1, states: The date that a defendant has sustained a conviction shall be the date that the guilt of the defendant has been established, whether by guilty plea, trial, or plea of nolo contendere. (emphasis supplied). Thus, there is a textual basis in the career offender guidelines for concluding that a guilt-establishing event (such as a plea where a defendant states that he does not wish to contest the charges), and not the formal entry of an adjudicatory judgment, determines whether and when there has been a countable conviction. 30 This view is borne out by the relevant guideline commentary. Application note 4 to Sec. 4B1.2 directs the sentencing court to utilize the provisions of Sec. 4A1.2 (captioned Definitions and Instructions for Computing Criminal History) in the counting of convictions under Sec. 4B1.1. Two provisions of Sec. 4A1.2 compel the conclusion that withheld adjudications following pleas of nolo contendere are countable convictions under Sec. 4B1.2. First, Sec. 4A1.2(a)(4) drives home the point that there can be a conviction prior to, and therefore without, the formal entry of an adjudicatory judgment:  'Convicted of an offense' for purposes of this provision, means that the guilt of the defendant has been established, whether by guilty plea, trial, or plea of nolo contendere. And Sec. 4A1.2(f), which governs diversionary dispositions like withheld adjudications, is quite clear that admissions of guilt (or pleas formally declining to contest guilt), rather than formal entries of judgment, control countability: 31 Diversion from the judicial process without a finding of guilt (e.g., deferred prosecution) is not counted [as a prior sentence]. A diversionary disposition resulting from a finding or admission of guilt, or a plea of nolo contendere, in a judicial proceeding is counted as a sentence under Sec. 4A1.1(c) [of the criminal history guidelines] even if a conviction is not formally entered, except that diversion from juvenile court is not counted. 32 The application note corresponding to the provision is explanatory of its purposes: Section 4A1.2(f) requires counting prior adult diversionary dispositions if they involved a judicial determination of guilt or an admission of guilt in open court. This reflects a policy that defendants who receive the benefit of a rehabilitative sentence and continue to commit crimes should not be treated with further leniency. Sec. 4A1.2, comment. (n. 9). 33 Employing an extremely literal reading, Pierce suggests that these guideline provisions are relevant only to the counting of convictions, and that they have no bearing on whether a particular event should be defined as a conviction. The difference between counting and defining convictions in this context is, however, only semantic. Section 4B1.1 directs that convictions of a certain type be counted, and other guidelines and commentary which elaborate upon the events to be counted essentially define that which is a conviction. In other words, the sentencing court is to count whatever is defined as a conviction (so long as it is for a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense). 34 When Secs. 4A1.2(a)(4) and (f) are applied to the question presented (as Sec. 4B1.2, comment. (n. 4) dictates), it becomes clear that the diversionary disposition at issue here--the 1984 Florida withheld adjudication--should be counted as a conviction under Sec. 4B1.1. See United States v. Jones, 910 F.2d 760, 761 (11th Cir.1990) (per curiam ) (withheld adjudication following a nolo contendere plea constitutes a conviction for career offender status). We therefore reject Pierce's argument that the district court erred in counting the withheld adjudication as a predicate conviction for purposes of the career offender guideline.