Whether the categorical approach applies in cases where the defendant was also convicted of using a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)

QUESTIONS PRESENTED The “categorical approach,” as adopted in Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990), mandates that courts, in determining whether a crime of conviction qualifies as a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) for purposes of the sentencing enhancement of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), may consider only the elements of the statute defining the crime, not the actual offense conduct, and may find that the crime is a “crime of violence” only if its necessary elements include the “use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force.” The questions presented in this case are: 1. Whether (as the court of appeals held) the categorical approach does not apply in any case in which the defendant was also convicted of “use[ of] a firearm” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) during the crime of conviction, because (in the circuit court’s view) in such cases a court may find that the actual offense conduct involved the use or threat of force, meaning that the crime may be deemed a “crime of violence” even if the statute defining the crime does not include the “use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force” as a necessary element. 2. Whether (as the court of appeals held) the crime of bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113 qualifies as a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(8)(A) even though the statute defining the crime does not include the “use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force” as a necessary element. i