UNITED STATES v. HOLMES (2019)

The government charged Michael Homes by indictment with possession of firearms by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e), and possession with intent to distribute cocaine and cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(C). Holmes moved to suppress on Fourth Amendment grounds evidence that the government obtained when law enforcement conducted a knock-and-talk investigation at Holmes’s residence. The district court denied the motion to suppress. The court ruled that no Fourth Amendment violation occurred when law enforcement conducted the knock-and-talk because Holmes failed to revoke the implied license that allowed law enforcement to approach his residence and knock. After a bench trial, Holmes was found guilty. The district court enhanced Holmes’s sentence pursuant to the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e), based in part on its ruling that his 1997 Georgia burglary conviction was for a violent felony.

On appeal, Holmes challenges the district court’s denial of his motion to suppress and its ruling that his Georgia burglary conviction was for a violent felony, qualifying him for an ACCA enhancement. After careful review and with the benefit of oral argument, we affirm the district court’s well-reasoned opinion denying Holmes’s motion to suppress. And we conclude, as Holmes concedes, that our decision in United States v. Gundy, 842 F.3d 1156 (11th Cir. 2016), forecloses his argument that his 1997 Georgia burglary conviction was not for a violent felony.

AFFIRMED.

PER CURIAM: