US v. Dozier: In this appeal, the Fourth Circuit considered whether the career offender enhancement was properly applied to Dozier’s sentence for distributing crack cocaine. The district court applied the modified categorical approach to determine whether Dozier’s WV prior attempt conviction qualified as a controlled substance offenses for sentencing purposes. Using de novo review, the Fourth Circuit concluded that the district court erred, analyzed the prior conviction under the categorical approach, and determined that the attempt conviction did qualify as a prior controlled substance offense. So while the district court may have used the wrong approach, it reached the correct result; the Fourth Circuit affirmed.
At issue here is the WV statute for general attempt (i.e. Dozier was convicted for attempting to distribute a controlled substance) . The Fourth Circuit determined that sentencing courts must compare the state and generic elements of attempt statutes, as well as the elements of the underlying substantive statutory offense in an analysis of whether a prior attempt conviction qualifies as a controlled substance offense. Based on its clear precedent, the panel found that the general divisibility of the punishment scheme in the WV attempt statute is not sufficient to compel the application of the modified categorical approach. Further, the modified categorical approach will apply only where the statute is divisible and at least one of the alternative definitions of “attempt” categorically matches the generic definition. Finally, the panel held that the underlying offense that Dozier attempted to commit was also a categorical match for a generic controlled substance offense, and concluded that he was properly deemed a career offender.