USCA11 Case: 20-10125 Date Filed: 12/16/2020 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 20-10125
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 0:19-cr-60229-WPD-1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
KAVORIS CLAYTON,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(December 16, 2020)
Before WILSON, NEWSOM, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
USCA11 Case: 20-10125 Date Filed: 12/16/2020 Page: 2 of 3
Kavoris Clayton appeals his 120-month sentence imposed after he pleaded
guilty to possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1),
and distribution of a controlled substance, in violation of
21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
He also had prior Florida felony convictions for attempted robbery and delivery of
cocaine. The district court sentenced him as a career offender, finding that his
prior Florida convictions were predicate offenses for career offender classification.
A defendant is a career offender under the Sentencing Guidelines if (1) he
was at least 18 years old when he committed the current offense; (2) the current
offense is a felony that is either a crime of violence or a controlled substance
offense; and (3) he has at least two prior felony convictions of either a crime of
violence or a controlled substance offense. U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1(a). Under the
Guidelines, a “controlled substance offense” is an offense that is a felony and “that
prohibits the manufacture, import, export, distribution, or dispensing of a
controlled substance . . . or the possession of a controlled substance . . . with intent
to manufacture, import, export, distribute, or dispense.” Id. § 4B1.2(b).
The Sentencing Guidelines do not state that a “controlled substance offense”
must require that the defendant knows the illicit nature of the substance. Id.
Clayton argues, however, that the Guidelines impliedly include such a mens rea
requirement. And because
Fla. Stat. § 893.13, under which he was previously
convicted for delivery of cocaine, does not require mens rea of the nature of the
2
USCA11 Case: 20-10125 Date Filed: 12/16/2020 Page: 3 of 3
controlled substance, Clayton argues that his conviction under that statute is not a
controlled substance offense. Thus, following his line of argument, the conviction
would not be a career offender predicate offense under the Sentencing Guidelines.
Yet, as he concedes, this argument is foreclosed by our precedent—namely, our
decision in United States v. Smith,
775 F.3d 1262 (11th Cir. 2014).
We are bound by our prior panel decisions unless we overrule them sitting
en banc, or the Supreme Court does so. United States v. Jordan,
635 F.3d 1181,
1189 (11th Cir. 2011). Our decision in Smith—holding that
Fla. Stat. § 893.13 is a
career offender predicate offense—remains binding in this circuit. 775 F.3d at
1268. Therefore, the district court correctly sentenced Clayton as a career
offender.
AFFIRMED.
3
