UNITED STATES v. FULLER (2019)

Korre Fuller appeals his sentence of 78 months of imprisonment for possessing a firearm as a convicted felon. See 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2). Fuller challenges the use of his two prior convictions for armed robbery, Fla. Stat. § 812.13(1), to enhance his sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines, U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(a). We affirm.

We review de novo whether a prior conviction constitutes a crime of violence under the Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Dixon, 874 F.3d 678, 680 (11th Cir. 2017).

Fuller concedes that his challenge to the use of his prior convictions to enhance his sentence is foreclosed by binding precedent. We held in United States v. Fritts, 841 F.3d 937, 940 (11th Cir. 2016), that a conviction for armed robbery under section 912.13 of the Florida Statutes categorically qualifies as a violent felony under the elements clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act. And recently the United States Supreme Court reached the same conclusion in Stokeling v. United States, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S.Ct. 544, 202 L.Ed.2d 512 (2019). Precedent that addresses whether an offense is a violent felony under the Act is also dispositive in deciding whether the offense qualified as a crime of violence under the elements clause of the Guidelines. Fritts, 841 F.3d at 940 & n.4. The district court correctly counted Fuller’s prior convictions for armed robbery as predicate offenses under the Guidelines.

We AFFIRM Fuller’s sentence.

PER CURIAM: