No. 23-7587

Jondell Middlebrooks v. United States

Lower Court: Second Circuit
Docketed: 2024-05-31
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response RequestedResponse WaivedRelisted (3)IFP
Tags: career-offender crime-of-violence guidelines-manual inchoate-offense inchoate-offenses physical-force sentencing-enhancement sentencing-guidelines statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2025-03-28 (distributed 3 times)
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by omission, has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Questions Presented The career offender enhancement dramatically increases the sentences of defendants with certain instant and prior convictions. As relevant here, Middlebrooks was classified as a career offender based on his 1998 conviction for attempted second-degree murder under New York Penal Law §§ 110, 125.25(1), which was determined to be a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. §§ 4B1.1(a), 4B1.2.1. The text of § 4B1.2(a) defines the term “crime of violence” to mean an offense that “has an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another” or “Ws murder, voluntary manslaughter, / kidnapping, aggravated assault, a forcible sex offense, robbery, arson, extortion, or the use or unlawful possession of a firearm described in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(a) or explosive material as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 841(c).” | Commentary to that enhancement provides that a “crime of violence” includes inchoate offenses such as “aiding and abetting, conspiring, and attempting to commit such offenses.” This case presents two questions: The 2021 Guidelines Manual was used to determine Middlebrooks’s offense level. i a % 1. Whether a crime that requires proof of bodily injury or death, but can be committed by omission, has as an element the use, , attempted use, or threatened use of physical force. 2. Whether the inclusion of inchoate offenses within the commentary is inconsistent with the text of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2 and, therefore, not legally binding. ll

Docket Entries

2025-03-31
Petition DENIED.
2025-03-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/28/2025.
2024-09-19
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/11/2024.
2024-09-03
Brief of United States in opposition submitted.
2024-09-03
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2024-07-18
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 3, 2024.
2024-07-16
Motion of United States for an extension of time submitted.
2024-07-16
Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 2, 2024 to September 2, 2024, submitted to The Clerk.
2024-07-03
Response Requested. (Due August 2, 2024)
2024-06-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-06-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2024-05-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 1, 2024)

Attorneys

Jondell Middlebrooks
Melissa Tuohey — Petitioner
Melissa Tuohey — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Respondent
Sarah M. HarrisActing Solicitor General, Respondent
Sarah M. HarrisActing Solicitor General, Respondent