United States v. Ritchey

While on parole, Ritchey allegedly threatened another individual. A parole officer visited Ritchey’s home and found a handgun. He pleaded guilty as a felon in possession. The PSR identified six prior convictions for breaking and entering a building with the intent to commit a felony or larceny therein, a felony under Michigan law, and asserted each qualified as a “violent felony” under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. 924(e) (ACCA). After a stolen firearm​ enhancement, Ritchey’s adjusted offense level was 16, but became 33 with the armed career criminal designation. Applying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility and an adjustment because Ritchey was on parole resulted in a sentencing range of 168-210 months. With ACCA’s mandatory minimum, the range became 180-210. Ritchey argued that the Michigan convictions did not qualify as “violent felonies” because the statute does not fit ACCA's definition of a “generic burglary.” The prosecution argued that, while the statute is broader than a “generic burglary,” it is divisible so that the court could determine whether Ritchey committed a generic burglary under the modified categorical approach. Felony informations for Ritchey’s prior offenses demonstrated that he “broke into and entered a … barn, a garage, or a store.” The district court found that “the Michigan statute arguably includes some things that would qualify as generic burglary and arguably some things that don’t,” such as breaking and entering a tent, but agreed with the prosecution and imposed a sentence of 180 months. The Sixth Circuit remanded for resentencing without consideration of ACCA. The Michigan statute’s terms are broader than generic burglary, and it is not divisible under the 2016 Supreme Court holding, Mathis v. United States. View "United States v. Ritchey" on Justia Law