No. 18-6346
Mark A. Dubarry v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 18-usc-1951(b) 18-usc-924(c)(3)(a) 18-usc-924c circuit-split crime-of-violence economic-harm federal-criminal-law force-clause hobbs-act robbery sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
HabeasCorpus JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
2018-11-16
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether Hobbs Act robbery is categorically a 'crime of violence' under the 'force clause' of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 1. In three circuits, pattern jury instructions extend Hobbs Act robbery (18 U.S.C. § 1951(b)) to an offense committed by causing fear of harm to intangible property. Because fear of economic harm can be caused without the use or threat of violent force, is Hobbs Act robbery categorically a “crime of violence” under the “force clause” of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)? i INTERESTED PARTIES There are no
Docket Entries
2018-11-19
Petition DENIED.
2018-11-01
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/16/2018.
2018-10-24
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2018-10-09
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 15, 2018)
Attorneys
Mark A. Dubarry
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent