United States v. Clifford B. Gandy, Jr.
Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
1DissentRosenbaum, Circuit Judge
I agree with the panel that Fla. Stat. § 784.03 is divisible into two separate offenses-one of which qualifies as a violent felony for purposes of the sentencing guidelines (the "bodily-harm" provision)1 and one of which does not (the "touch-or-strike" provision)2 . I also agree that the fact that Clifford Gandy Jr.'s plea was one of nolo contendere does not change the analysis in this case and that the district court was entitled to look to the arrest report to determine the offense of conviction because the report was incorporated by reference into Gandy's sentence recommendation "as a…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Shepard v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2005
- Mathis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
- Descamps v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.