Sixth Circuit: Juries Can Hear the Details of Prior Crimes in Armed Career Criminal Cases
On October 8, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, which covers Kentucky, decided United States v. Mixon, No. 25-5443. It is a published opinion, which makes it binding on federal courts in Kentucky. It answers a question that matters to anyone facing an enhanced federal gun charge: how much a jury gets to hear about a defendant's past.
What happened
Charles Mixon was convicted in federal court in East Tennessee of carjacking a woman at gunpoint in Bristol, Tennessee, along with several firearm charges. One of those was being a felon in possession of a firearm under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).
The ACCA matters enormously at sentencing. A felon-in-possession conviction normally carries a maximum of 15 years. Under the ACCA, if the defendant has three prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses committed on different occasions, 15 years becomes the mandatory minimum.
In 2024, the Supreme Court held in Erlinger v. United States that a jury, not a judge, must decide unanimously and beyond a reasonable doubt whether the prior offenses happened on different occasions. Mixon's case was one of the first tried under that new rule. The trial court split the trial into two phases, and the jury heard about his prior Texas robbery and burglary convictions only in the second phase. The jury found the ACCA applied, and Mixon received about 31 years in total.
What the court decided
The Sixth Circuit affirmed in a 2-1 decision. Two holdings stand out:
No stipulating your way out of the details. Defendants can already stipulate that they are convicted felons, so the jury doesn't hear the specifics of the old case. Mixon asked to extend that rule to the "different occasions" question. The court refused, treating the issue as a question of first impression. It reasoned that whether crimes happened on separate occasions depends on the facts: when, where, and how they occurred. The jury is entitled to hear that story.
Texas burglary counts. The majority held that Mixon's Texas burglary convictions qualify as ACCA predicates. Judge Bloomekatz dissented on this point. She argued that the Texas statute reaches conduct broader than ordinary burglary. If she were right, Mixon would lack three qualifying priors and would face a far lower sentence.
Why it matters
After Erlinger, many defense lawyers hoped ACCA trials would let defendants keep the details of old cases away from the jury. Mixon shuts that door in the Sixth Circuit. In an ACCA occasions trial in Kentucky's federal courts, prosecutors may present evidence about the dates, locations, and nature of prior crimes.
The case also shows that which prior convictions count is often the whole ballgame. Whether a particular state's burglary, robbery, or drug statute qualifies under the ACCA can turn on technical comparisons, and judges disagree. Out-of-state convictions deserve especially close scrutiny. A split decision like this one may also draw further review.
Talk to a lawyer early
If you have prior felony convictions and are facing a federal firearm charge, the difference between a 15-year maximum and a 15-year minimum may depend on legal arguments that need to be raised early and preserved carefully.
B.J. Early is admitted to practice in the U.S. District Courts for the Western District of Kentucky, the Southern District of Indiana, and the Southern District of Florida. If you are under investigation or have been charged with a federal crime, contact the Law Office of B.J. Early, PLLC to schedule a free consultation.
This post is for general information only and is not legal advice. Past results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome in any future matter.