United States v. Nix

628 F.3d 1341, 2010 WL 5391466
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedDecember 30, 2010
Docket09-15335
StatusPublished
Cited by27 cases

This text of 628 F.3d 1341 (United States v. Nix) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Nix, 628 F.3d 1341, 2010 WL 5391466 (11th Cir. 2010).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Anthony Nix pled guilty to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), and the district court sentenced him as an armed career criminal to prison for 180 months, the minimum sentence permitted by statute, the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). 1 He now appeals his sentence, *1342 arguing that two of the three convictions the district court used to qualify him an armed career offender do not qualify as violent felonies under the § 924(e): (1) resisting an arresting officer with violence, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 843.01, and (2) fleeing and eluding at high speed, in violation of Fla. Stat. § 316.1935(3).

We reject Nix’s challenge to the § 843.01 conviction, holding that a such conviction constitutes a violent felony under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). This is the same holding we recently reached in United States v. Hayes, 2010 WL 3489973 (September 8, 2010). Although the Hayes decision was not published, we are persuaded by its rationale regarding § 843.01 and therefore adopt its holding. Nix’s challenge to the § 316.1935(3) conviction is foreclosed by United States v. Harris, 586 F.3d 1283 (11th Cir.2009), which we are bound to follow.

AFFIRMED.

1

. The sentencing range prescribed by the Sentencing Guidelines was 168-210 months' imprisonment.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Aristotle Sampson v. FCC Coleman-USP I Warden
663 F. App'x 819 (Eleventh Circuit, 2016)
United States v. Tywan Hill
799 F.3d 1318 (Eleventh Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Andrew D. Dixon
598 F. App'x 704 (Eleventh Circuit, 2015)
United States v. Michael Perez
572 F. App'x 787 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
Joseph Strickland v. N.C. English
566 F. App'x 842 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Enrique Vinales
564 F. App'x 518 (Eleventh Circuit, 2014)
United States v. Charles Bailey
522 F. App'x 497 (Eleventh Circuit, 2013)
United States v. Charles Calvin Foster
496 F. App'x 1 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Freeman Mitchell Morris
486 F. App'x 853 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Maurice Jefferson
478 F. App'x 589 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Guillermo Cerda-Enriquez
477 F. App'x 565 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Derrek Lamar Pritchard
458 F. App'x 846 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Samuel Allen Sanders
461 F. App'x 854 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Ricardo Deleon Colon
458 F. App'x 825 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Leon Amuel Devo, Jr.
457 F. App'x 908 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Lee
458 F. App'x 741 (Tenth Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Anthony Barrow
451 F. App'x 885 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Jermaine Brown
450 F. App'x 916 (Eleventh Circuit, 2012)
United States v. Julio Rolon
445 F. App'x 314 (Eleventh Circuit, 2011)
Nix v. United States
181 L. Ed. 2d 150 (Supreme Court, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
628 F.3d 1341, 2010 WL 5391466, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-nix-ca11-2010.