No. 20-6622
Devon Mitchell v. United States
IFP
Tags: 18-usc-924 armed-robbery bank-robbery crimes-of-violence criminal-law federal-criminal-law ninth-circuit statutory-interpretation violent-crime
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2021-03-19
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that bank robbery and armed bank robbery are 'crimes of violence' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. By denying Petitioner’s Petition For Certificate of Appealability, did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals err in implicitly holding that Bank Robbery, and Armed Bank Robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d), respectively, are “crimes of violence” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)?
Docket Entries
2021-03-22
Petition DENIED. Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
2021-03-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/19/2021.
2021-03-02
Reply of petitioner Michael J. Bresnehan submitted.
2021-02-16
Memorandum of respondent United States of America opposition filed.
2021-01-11
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including February 16, 2021.
2021-01-06
Motion to extend the time to file a response from January 14, 2021 to February 16, 2021, submitted to The Clerk.
2020-12-10
Attorneys
United States of America
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent