I
Where a divisible offense may be committed two ways, one
of which satisfies the "crime of violence" element of
physical force, and one of which does not, and where the
factual basis for the plea could establish either offense,
may the federal sentencing court find the defendant was
necessarily convicted of the qualifying offense, as in the
case below, or must the federal court presume the
defendant was convicted of the non-qualifying offense, as
in United States v. Horse Looking, 828 F.3d 744 (8th Cir.
2016)?

II

Whether convictions based upon pleas of nolo contendere
support the application of the modified categorical
approach to establish a Guidelines "crime of violence"
where the Florida convictions do not incorporate
admissions of guilt, like the guilty pleas in Shepard v.
United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005), and whether the district
court violated the Full Faith & Credit statute because
Florida courts would not construe the prior judgments to
encompass findings of battery by "intentionally causing
bodily harm" necessary to establish the "physical force"
element of a crime of violence?

Where a divisible offense may be committed two ways, one of which satisfies the 'crime of violence' element of physical force, and one of which does not, and where the factual basis for the plea could establish either offense, may the federal sentencing court find the defendant was necessarily convicted of the qualifying offense, or must the federal court presume the defendant was convicted of the non-qualifying offense?