Whether a state robbery offense that includes as an element the requirement of overcoming victim resistance by use of force is a violent felony under the elements clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i), if state appellate courts have specifically held that the amount of force used to overcome resistance is immaterial

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW I. Is a state robbery offense that includes as an element the requirement of overcoming victim resistance by use of force a violent felony under the elements clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i), if state appellate courts have specifically held that the amount of force used to overcome resistance is immaterial? II. What amount of force satisfies this Court’s definition of “physical force” in the elements clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(), in Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133, 140 (2010), as violent force—that is, force capable of causing physical pain or injury to another person? i NO. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES October Term 2017 ROBERT SERRANO, Petitioner, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. DECLARATION OF COUNSEL Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 29.2, I, Peter E. Edwards, Assistant Federal Public Defender for the District of New Mexico, declare under penalty of perjury that I am a member of the bar of this court and counsel for petitioner, ROBERT SERRANO, and that I caused to be mailed a copy of the petition for writ of certiorari to this court by first class mail, postage prepaid by depositing the original and ten copies in an envelope addressed to the Clerk of this Court, at approximately 5:00 p.m. on July 10, 2018. s/_ Peter E. Edwards Peter E. Edwards Attorney for Petitioner FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER 506 S. Main St., Suite 400 Las Cruces, NM 88001 (575) 527-6930 Peter _Edwards@fd.org ii NO. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES October Term 2017 ROBERT SERRANO, Petitioner, vs. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.