No. 18-7838

William Floyd Moore v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2019-02-07
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: armed-career-criminal-act bank-robbery crime-of-violence elements-clause general-intent intimidation specific-intent statutory-interpretation violent-felony
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2019-03-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether federal bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) is a crime of violence under the elements clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act's violent felony definition, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i)

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

QUESTION PRESENTED ON REVIEW Given this Court’s holding in Carter v. United States, 530 U.S. 255, 268 (2000), that federal bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) is a general intent rather than a specific intent crime, and given decades of circuit precedent holding that intimidation under the statute is judged by the reasonable reaction of the listener rather than by the defendant’s intent, could reasonable jurists conclude that federal bank robbery is not a crime of violence under the elements clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act’s violent felony definition, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i), because the offense fails to require any intentional use, attempted use, or threatened use of violent physical force? i

Docket Entries

2019-03-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.
2019-02-14
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-02-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 11, 2019)

Attorneys

United States
Noel J. FranciscoSolicitor General, Respondent
William Floyd Moore
Elizabeth Gillingham DailyFederal Public Defenders, Petitioner