United States v. Rodriquez
Rodriquez was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm. During the sentencing phase of the trial, the government asked the district court to enhance Rodriquez's sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA). The ACCA sets a mandatory minimum sentence of fifteen years for a person who is convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and has three prior convictions for a "violent felony" or a "serious drug offense." Rodriquez had had three prior convictions for delivery of a controlled substance and two prior convictions for burglary. The district court concluded that Rodriquez's prior burglary convictions were "violent felonies" and qualified as two predicate offenses for the purposes of the ACCA, but that the three drug convictions did not qualify. Therefore, Rodriquez's sentence could not be enhanced.
On appeal, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision. Under the ACCA, the definition of a "serious drug offense" is an offense which carries a "maximum term of imprisonment" of ten years or more. Under Washington state law, Rodriquez's three convictions for a drug offense carried a maximum penalty of five years each. However, the law also contained a recidivism provision which set a maximum penalty of ten years for a second or subsequent offense. The Ninth Circuit held that the "maximum term of imprisonment" under the ACCA did not refer to recidivism provisions.
Question Presented
Whether a state drug-trafficking offense, for which state law authorized a ten-year sentence because the defendant was a recidivist, qualifies as a predicate offense under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. 924(e) (2000 & Supp. IV 2004).
