Scott v. United States

Background

Antonio Scott moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a federal procedure allowing a prisoner to challenge a sentence, to vacate his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The conviction concerned using, carrying, or possessing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence or drug-trafficking crime. Scott relied on United States v. Davis, in which the Supreme Court held that Section 924(c)’s residual clause—the provision covering offenses involving a substantial risk that force may be used—was unconstitutionally vague.

A jury had convicted Scott of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery, attempted Hobbs Act robbery, attempted possession of marijuana with intent to distribute, and the Section 924(c) firearm offense. The jury instructions required the jury to find that Scott had committed at least one of the first three offenses to convict him on the firearm count, but the verdict form did not identify which offense or offenses served as the predicate. Scott received a total sentence of 207 months, including a consecutive 120-month sentence on the firearm count.

The court had previously denied Scott’s Section 2255 motion. After the Supreme Court held in United States v. Taylor that attempted Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence under Section 924(c), the Court of Appeals vacated the prior order and sent the matter back for further proceedings concerning whether any valid predicate supported Scott’s firearm conviction.

Legal Standard

After Davis, a crime of violence can support a Section 924(c) conviction only if it satisfies the force clause, which requires the offense to include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force. The residual clause can no longer provide a valid crime-of-violence predicate. Section 924(c) also permits a firearm conviction based on a qualifying drug-trafficking crime.

The court also applied the rule that a conviction may stand when a jury was instructed on multiple theories and at least one theory later becomes invalid, if the valid theory necessarily supported the verdict and the invalid instruction did not substantially influence the result.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that Scott’s conviction for attempted possession of marijuana with intent to distribute remained a valid predicate drug-trafficking crime. Scott argued that the federal marijuana statute could sometimes result in misdemeanor treatment and therefore did not categorically define a felony. He relied on Moncrieffe v. Holder, which addressed how state marijuana convictions are treated in immigration proceedings.

The court rejected that argument. It explained that Moncrieffe concerned state convictions under immigration law, not a federal conviction under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(D). For an unspecified quantity of marijuana, Section 841(b)(1)(D)’s default punishment is up to five years in prison, making the offense a felony. The statute contains an exception for distributing a small amount of marijuana without payment, but the court said the defendant must establish the facts supporting that exception. Scott did not do so at trial. He was charged with, convicted of, and sentenced for a felony punishable under the Controlled Substances Act.

The court therefore concluded that Count Three was a valid drug-trafficking predicate for the Section 924(c) conviction. It also rejected Scott’s argument based on the verdict form. The court found that the attempted robbery charge was inseparably connected to the conspiracy and the attempted marijuana-possession charge. Based on the trial evidence and the relationship among the offenses, the court concluded that the jury could not have found that Scott used or carried the firearm in connection with one offense but not the other. The firearm conviction was consequently supported by the narcotics conviction even though the jury did not specify its predicate.

Disposition

The court denied Scott’s motion to vacate his Section 924(c) conviction. It directed the Clerk of Court to mail the order to Scott and close the open motions at docket entries 152, 158, 168, and 170.