United States v. Troy Bennett
Opinion
Case: 18-10897 Date Filed: 05/10/2019 Page: 1 of 2
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ______________________
No. 18-10897 Non-Argument Calendar ______________________
D.C. Docket No. 6:16-cr-00256-CEM-TBS-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TROY BENNETT, Defendant-Appellant.
______________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida ______________________
(May 10, 2019)
Before, TJOFLAT, JORDAN, and FAY, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: Case: 18-10897 Date Filed: 05/10/2019 Page: 2 of 2
Troy Bennett appeals his 300-month sentence, which the district court
imposed pursuant to the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). We affirm
because both of Mr. Bennett’s arguments are foreclosed by Eleventh Circuit
precedent. See United States v. Hill, 799 F.3d 1318, 1323 (11th Cir. 2015) (holding
that a conviction for resisting an officer with violence pursuant to Fla. Stat. §843.01
is a violent felony under the ACCA’s elements clause); United States v. Smith, 775
F.3d 1262, 1267-68 (11th Cir. 2014) (holding that a conviction for possession of
cocaine with the intent to distribute pursuant to Fla. Stat. §893.13 is a serious drug
offense under the ACCA). We recognize Mr. Bennett’s arguments that cases like
Hill and Smith were incorrectly decided, but we are nevertheless bound to follow
them. See, e.g., Smith v. GTE Corp., 236 F.3d 1292, 1303 (11th Cir. 2001).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States v. Troy Bennett (United States v. Troy Bennett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.