No. 19-8756
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 18-usc-924c3a attempted-hobbs-act-robbery attempted-offense categorical-approach crime-of-violence criminal-statute federal-sentencing james-v-united-states statutory-interpretation united-states-v-davis
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)
If a completed offense is categorically a 'crime of violence' within 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)'s elements clause, is the attempted commission of that offense automatically a categorical 'crime of violence' irrespective of the categorical approach required by United States v. Davis, 139 S.Ct. 2319 (2019)?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED If a completed offense is categorically a “crime of violence” within 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)’s elements clause, is the attempted commission of that offense automatically a categorical “crime of violence” irrespective of the categorical approach required by United States v. Davis, 139 S.Ct. 2319 (2019) ? ii INTERESTED PARTIES There are no
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-02
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-06-25
Waiver of right of respondent Untied States to respond filed.
2020-06-15
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 20, 2020)
Attorneys
Kevin Ingram
Sara J Varner — Indiana Federal Community Defenders, Petitioner
Sara J Varner — Indiana Federal Community Defenders, Petitioner
Untied States
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent