Eleventh Circuit applies the reasoning of Begay to hold that a conspiracy which does not require an overt act is not a predicate for career offender.

http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200910521.pdf

In 2008 in Begay, the Supreme Court used a categorical approach to conclude that DUI does not qualify as a violent felony for purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act.  In United States v. Whitson, 09-10521, the Eleventh Circuit followed the reasoning in Begay to find that a conspiracy to commit a strong arm robbery which does not require an overt act is not a crime of violence for career offender purposes.  Since the crime of conspiracy is not on the list of example crimes of violence, it is examined in the residual category in a three step process. First, the court looks at the elements required to violate the statute in question (in this case South Carolina conspiracy).  The South Carolina conspiracy involved in this case did not require an overt act, such that the statute is violated once there is an agreement to do an unlawful act.  Then the court considers whether there is a risk of violence associated with the crime.  Then under Begay, the court must also consider whether the crime is roughly similar in kind as well as the degree of risk posed.  Because the Eleventh Circuit found that South Carolina conspiracy is not similar, it found that it is not a predicate for career offender.  This creates a split with the Fourth Circuit.