Opinion
No: 14-2396
08-10-2016
United States of America, Plaintiff–Appellee v. Richard Mathis, Defendant–Appellant.
Andrew H. Kahl, Marc Krickbaum, Maureen McGuire, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Attorney's Office, Des Moines, IA, John D. Keller, for Plaintiff–Appellee. Richard Mathis, Oxford, WI, Pro Se. John P. Messina, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender's Office, Southern District of Iowa, Des Moines, IA, for Defendant–Appellant.
Andrew H. Kahl, Marc Krickbaum, Maureen McGuire, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, U.S. Attorney's Office, Des Moines, IA, John D. Keller, for Plaintiff–Appellee.
Richard Mathis, Oxford, WI, Pro Se.
John P. Messina, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Federal Public Defender's Office, Southern District of Iowa, Des Moines, IA, for Defendant–Appellant.
Before LOKEN and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
JUDGMENT
On June 23, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the judgment of this court in United States v. Mathis , 786 F.3d 1068 (8th Cir. 2015) (“Mathis I ”), holding that “[b]ecause the elements of Iowa's burglary law are broader than those of generic burglary, Mathis's convictions under that law cannot give rise to an ACCA [ (Armed Career Criminal Act) ] sentence.” Mathis v. United States , ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S.Ct. 2243, 195 L.Ed.2d 604 (2016). Based on the Supreme Court's action, we vacate Section II.A. of our opinion, reverse the district court's finding that Mathis has the requisite predicate “violent felonies” to be categorized as an armed career criminal under the ACCA, and remand for resentencing. For the reasons set forth in Section II.B. of our opinion, we affirm the district court in all other respects. See Mathis I , 786 F.3d at 1075–76.