Did the Tenth Circuit determine a New Mexico residential burglary is burglary' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i1) in a way that contravenes this Court's mandate that a sentencing court may impose an Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) sentence on an accused only if the government proves with certainty that his prior offenses necessarily satisfy a predicate offense definition?

Questions Presented I. Did the Tenth Circuit determine a New Mexico residential burglary is “burglary” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i1) in a way that contravenes this Court’s mandate that a sentencing court may impose an Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) sentence on an accused only if the government proves with certainty that his prior offenses necessarily satisfy a predicate offense definition? Il. New Mexico courts have held that the state’s aggravated assault statute does not have any mens rea element with respect to the victim. Does the Tenth Circuit’s decision that the offense nonetheless has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of violent force against the person of another so as to qualify as a ‘violent felony’ under the ACCA, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(1), conflict with the decisions of the Fourth, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth and Eleventh Circuits that have held that an offense must have as an element a mens rea relating to the victim to fall within the ACCA’s force clause? i