No. 20-6582

Curtis Ward v. United States

Lower Court: Ninth Circuit
Docketed: 2020-12-09
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Relisted (2)IFP Experienced Counsel
Tags: 18-usc-2113 18-usc-924(c) bank-robbery categorical-approach crime-of-violence federal-armed-bank-robbery force-clause mandatory-sentencing statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Takings HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference: 2021-06-17 (distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Does federal armed bank robbery qualify as a crime of violence under the force clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Question Presented for Review Federal armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) can be committed “by force and violence, or by intimidation ... or... by extortion.” Federal bank robbery does not require—as an element of the offense—the specific intent to use, attempt to use, or threat to use violent physical force. In fact, numerous federal circuits interpret federal bank robbery to include the nonviolent conduct of intimidation and extortion as a request for money. Does federal armed bank robbery qualify as a crime of violence under the force clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A)? ii List of Proceedings 1. U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada, United States v. Curtis Ward, Case Nos. 2:08-cr-00224-KJD, 2:16-cv-01443-KJD: Dkt. 58, Order denying motion to vacate and denying a certificate of appealability entered March 31, 2020; Dkt. 59, Judgment entered March 31, 2020. 2. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, United States v. Curtis Ward, Case No. 2016061: Dkt. 3, Order denying certificate of appealability entered August 7, 2020. iii

Docket Entries

2021-06-21
Petition DENIED.
2021-06-14
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/17/2021.
2021-02-25
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/19/2021.
2021-02-18
Reply of petitioner Curtis Ward filed.
2021-02-08
Memorandum of respondent United States of America filed.
2020-12-31
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 8, 2021.
2020-12-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 8, 2021 to February 8, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-12-03
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 8, 2021)

Attorneys

Curtis Ward
Amy B. ClearyFederal Public Defender, District of Nevada, Petitioner
Amy B. ClearyFederal Public Defender, District of Nevada, Petitioner
United States of America
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarActing Solicitor General, Respondent