Jeffery L. Davis v. USA, No. 22-11098 (11th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
USCA11 Case: 22-11098 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 02/09/2023 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 22-11098 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JEFFERY L. DAVIS, Defendant-Appellant. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:20-cr-00348-SDM-CPT-1 ____________________ USCA11 Case: 22-11098 2 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 02/09/2023 Opinion of the Court Page: 2 of 3 22-11098 Before JORDAN, NEWSOM, and GRANT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Michelle Yard, appointed counsel for Jeffery Davis in this direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. In reaching this conclusion, we have considered Mr. Davis’ response to his counsel’s motion to withdraw. Mr. Davis contends that he was convicted of non-existent offenses for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) given the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Taylor v. United States, 142 S.Ct. 2015, 2020-21 (2022) (holding that attempted Hobbs Act robbery does not constitute a crime of violence under § 924(3)(C)(A), the elements clause of the ACCA). We disagree. First, Taylor does not affect Mr. Davis’ guilty pleas to the Hobbs Act robbery offenses in Counts 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 17. Those offenses were charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1951, and Taylor did not call into question the stand-alone validity of that provision. Second, Taylor does not affect Mr. Davis’ guilty pleas to the firearm offenses charged in Counts 4, 6, and 10. Those offenses were charged under 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) & 2, and were based on the use, carrying, or brandishing of a firearm by Mr. Davis USCA11 Case: 22-11098 22-11098 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 02/09/2023 Opinion of the Court Page: 3 of 3 3 or his co-defendant during and in relation to the Hobbs Act robberies charged in Counts 3, 5, and 9. Taylor does not impact or call into question Counts 4, 6, and 10 because the underlying Hobbs Act robberies for the firearm charges (those set out in Counts 3, 5, and 9) were not mere attempts. They were instead successful robberies in which Mr. Davis and his co-defendant took money from each of the establishments at issue. See D.E. 142 at 36-37 (government’s factual proffer for Counts 3, 4, 5, 6, 9, & 10). Because independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Mr. Davis’ convictions and sentences are AFFIRMED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
