No. 19-6706
Ramsin Jonathan Malek v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: armed-robbery categorical-approach crime-of-violence criminal-law federal-bank-robbery federal-crimes federal-criminal-procedure force-clause ninth-circuit sentencing statutory-interpretation violent-crime
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration LaborRelations
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration LaborRelations
Latest Conference:
2020-01-10
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether this Court should grant certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit's decision because armed robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(d) does not categorically qualify as a 'crime of violence' under the force clause of § 924(c)
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED A. Whether this Court should grant certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit’s decision because armed robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(d) does not categorically qualify as a “crime of violence” under the force clause of § 924(c). ii
Docket Entries
2020-01-13
Petition DENIED.
2019-12-12
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 1/10/2020.
2019-12-03
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-11-14
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due December 20, 2019)
Attorneys
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent