Post-Descamps World. Paresh Patel, Federal Public Defender, D.Md. October 8, 2015

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Post-Descamps World. Paresh Patel, Federal Public Defender, D.Md. October 8, 2015"

Transcription

1 Post-Descamps World Paresh Patel, Federal Public Defender, D.Md. October 8, 2015

2 Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct (June 20, 2013) Clarified when and how to use the modified categorical framework

3 Overview 1. The world as it existed before Descamps: Mass confusion about application of the modified categorical approach 2. Descamps clarifies and narrows application of elements-driven modified categorical approach: Issue, Facts, Three Main Principles, and Rationale 3. Descamps in practice: Six-step analysis

4 Pre-Descamps World After Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) and progeny, mass confusion about when and how modified categorical approach applies.

5 DESCAMPS: SPECIFICS At issue: whether prior conviction for California burglary statute qualified as generic burglary violent felony under ACCA. Generic burglary requires: 1) unprivileged or unlawful entry or remaining in 2) a building or structure 3) with intent to commit a crime. Elements of California statute: Entry into building with intent to commit a crime. Missing generic burglary element of unlawful entry : fact that plea colloquy reflected that defendant actually broke and entered into grocery store did not matter. California burglary can never qualify as a generic burglary.

6 DESCAMPS V. UNITED STATES, 133 S. Ct (2013) MAIN RULES Taylor modified categorical approach: only applies if statute is divisible with alternative elements some which match violent felony/crime of violence offense/serious drug offense/controlled substance offense definition and some which do not. Modified categorical approach only applies to determine which of the elements the defendant was convicted of, not to determine underlying conduct/facts. If prior offense of conviction is missing element necessary to constitute a violent felony/crime of violence/serious drug offense/controlled substance offense, the prior offense can never qualify as recidivist sentencing predicate.

7 DESCAMPS: Overbroad Element = Missing Element Overbroad element that fails to satisfy violent felony/ crime of violence/ serious drug offense/ controlled substance definition is same as missing element.

8 Reasoning behind elements-driven modified categorical approach Text/Leg History of ACCA enhancement only permit recidivist enhancements based on convictions/elements - not based on conduct in each individual case. Prevent impermissible factfinding under the Sixth Amendment: a. non-elemental facts are not necessarily found by jury; b. in pleas, jury trial not waived with respect to nonelemental facts Unfairness : a. No incentive to contest non-elemental, superfluous facts in guilty plea colloquy; b. deprives def. of benefits of neg. plea deals.

9 Descamps in practice: Six-Step analysis

10 Step 1 Determine the definition of the applicable federal recidivist sentencing enhancement predicate.

11 Step 1: Example ACCA violent felony = 1. Force Clause: Has an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against a person. Physical force means violent force, i.e., force capable of causing physical injury or pain. 2. Enumerated offenses: burglary, arson, extortion, use of explosives (determined by generic definition) 3. Residual clause: Presents serious risk of physical injury at similar level to enumerated offenses + purposeful, violent, and aggressive.

12 Step 2 Determine the elements of prior offense of conviction by looking at: face of the statute, jury instructions, state law, federal law interpreting state offense

13 Step 3 Determine whether the elements of the prior offense always match or are narrower than the applicable federal recidivist sentencing predicate definition. If so, end of inquiry. Modified categorical approach does not apply, and prior offense is always a federal recidivist predicate.

14 Step 3: Example State burglary statute requires proof of three elements: (1) unlawful entry, (2) into a building, (3) with intent to commit a crime. Matches ACCA generic burglary definition. Always qualifies as an ACCA violent felony. End of inquiry.

15 Step 4: The prior offense sometimes qualifies as a federal recidivist sentencing predicate if it has alternative elements some which match or are narrower than the federal recidivist definition and some which do not. If the statute is divisible in this way, go the modified categorical approach. If not, skip to step 6.

16 Step 4: Example State burglary statute has two subsections with alternative elements: Subsection (a) requires (1) unlawful entry (2) into a building (3) with intent to commit a crime. Subsection (b) requires (1) unlawful entry (2) into a vehicle (3) with intent to commit a crime. Subsection (a) has all three elements of an ACCA generic burglary, but subsection (b) is missing the building element. Thus, it is not ACCA generic burglary, and also does not fit within ACCA force clause. Subsection (a) qualifies as a violent felony while subsection (b) does not. Go to modified categorical approach.

17 Step 4: BE CAREFUL

18 Alternative elements do not always mean modified categorical approach applies Modified categorical approach only applies if one set of alternative elements matches violent felony/crime of violence/serious drug offense/controlled substance offense definition and one set does not. If none of alternative elements match federal sentencing recidivist enhancement definition, then inquiry ends.

19 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Sometimes, despite the fact that there may be different statutory phrases listed in the disjunctive, they are not elements and do not trigger modified categorical approach because phrases are either: 1. Non-exhaustive list of examples of different factual means not elements 2. Exhaustive list of factual means not elements 3. They go the jury as a single unitary element so that jury is not required to unanimously find one phrase to the exclusion of the other. 4. They are a term of art with single definition.

20 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Example: Phrases are non-exhaustive list of factual means: South Carolina conviction for assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature requires proof of two elements: (1) unlawful act of violent injury (which only requires offensive touching) and (2) circumstances of aggravation. Under South Carolina case law, aggravation includes use of serious bodily injury, intent to commit a felony, disparity in age, physical condition or sex, indecent liberties, purposeful infliction of shame, resistance of lawful authorities, and others. Example continued on next page

21 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Example continued: Non-exhaustive list of factual means: Aggravation list under South Carolina offense = merely illustrative examples of factual means for satisfying aggravation element. Thus, aggravation element is indivisible and modified categorical approach does not apply. Because aggravation element is overbroad and fails to match definition of the force clause it never qualifies as an ACCA violent felony. United States v. Hemingway, 734 F.3d 323 (4 th Cir. 2013); see also United States v. Howard, 742 F.3d 1334 (11 th Cir. 2014) (different phrases in burglary statute were illustrative examples of factual means not alternative elements).

22 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Example: Phrases are exhaustive list of factual means: A state statute prohibits use of force against another by stabbing, shooting, or squirting water. Although the statute limits the list of ways of satisfying the force element, assume that state case law holds that stabbing, shooting, and squirting water are just factual means for satisfying the force element. Thus, state force element is indivisible and modified categorical approach does not apply. Because the state force element is overbroad and fails to match the ACCA force clause, it never qualifies as a violent felony.

23 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Example: Two terms are single indivisible element because they go to jury in one clump. Maryland second degree assault prohibits offensive physical contact with or physical harm to another. Under Maryland law, the jury is not required to unanimously find one of these phrases to the exclusion of the other; rather both terms go the jury as a single indivisible element. Thus, the phrases are alternative means for satisfying a single element, and modified categorical approach does not apply. Example continued on next page

24 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Example continued: Two terms are single indivisible element because they go to jury in one clump. Because the Maryland element fails to match the ACCA violent felony definition under the force clause, the state offense never qualifies as a violent felony. United States v. Royal, 731 F.3d 333 (4 th Cir. 2013) See also Omargharib v. Holder, 775 F.3d 192 (4 th Cir. 2014);Rendon v. Holder, 764 F.3d 1077 (9 th Cir. 2014); United States v. Fuertes, F.3d, 2015 WL (4 th Cir. 2015) (all holding that disjunctively worded statute was indivisible because under state law, jury did not have to unanimously find one word vs. the other; two words were part of single unitary element).

25 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Second Example: Two terms are single indivisible element because they go to jury in one clump. State assault statute prohibits reckless or intentional infliction of strong physical force capable of causing bodily injury or pain. Under state law, the jury is not required to unanimously find one of these phrases to the exclusion of the other; rather both terms go the jury as a single indivisible element. Thus, the phrases are alternative means for satisfying a single element, and modified categorical approach does not apply. Example continued on next page

26 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Example continued: Two terms are single indivisible element because they go to jury in one clump. Because the reckless or intentional element fails to match the ACCA violent felony definition under the force clause, the state offense never qualifies as a violent felony. See United States v. Marcia-Acosta, 780 F.3d 1244 (9 th Cir. 2015)

27 Disjunctive phrases do not always equal alternative elements: Looks are Deceiving. Example: Term of Art Single Indivisible Element: California battery statue prohibits any willful and unlawful use of force or violence. However, force or violence merely means offensive touching. Therefore, modified categorical approach does not apply. And offensive touching does not equal violent force necessary to satisfy ACCA force clause. Thus, state offense never qualifies as a violent felony. United States v. Herrera, 2008 WL (10 th Cir. 2008)

28 Beware: Descamps footnote Footnote 2: Says that whatever a statute lists (whether elements or means), the modified categorical approach applies. In conflict with the body of the opinion, which says there must be alternative elements to trigger the modified categorical approach. See United States v. Royal, 731 F.3d 333 (4 th Cir. 2013) (holding that statute is only divisible when alternative elements not means exist); Omargharib v. Holder, 775 F.3d 192 (4 th Cir. 2014) (same); Rendon v. Holder,764 F.3d 1077 (9 th Cir. 2014) (same); United States v. Marcia-Acosta, 780 F.3d 1244 (9 th Cir. 2015) (same). Beware: United States v. Trent, 767 F.3d 1046 (10 th Cir. 2014) (holding in dicta that statute is divisible when it has alternative means or elements); United States v. Mathis, 786 F.3d 1068 (8 th Cir. 2015) (adopting means test without any analysis).

29 Step 5: If the prior offense has alternative elements some which match federal recidivist definition and some which do not review the Taylor/Shepard documents (charging document, plea agreement, plea colloquy transcript, jury instructions, bench trial findings of court, judgment) to determine which of the alternative elements the defendant was necessarily convicted of, not to determine how the defendant factually committed the offense.

30 Step 5: BE CAREFUL Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate

31 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Both sets of elements alleged in Taylor/Shepard documents: not enough If the charging document, jury instructions, or plea colloquy, without limitation, alleges both qualifying federal recidivist predicate elements and non-qualifying predicate elements, this is not enough to establish that defendant necessarily pled to qualifying predicate elements. Court must assume that defendant pled to nonqualifying elements, i.e. the most innocent elements or least of the elements. See Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (2010); Moncrieffe v. Holder, 133 S. Ct (2013).

32 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Both sets of elements alleged in Taylor/Shepard documents: not enough Example: A state assault statute has alternative subsections with alternative elements. Subsection (a) requires 1) unlawful entry 2) into a building 3) with intent to commit a crime. Subsection (b) requires 1) unlawful entry 2) into a dwelling 3) with intent to commit a crime. The modified categorical approach applies because subsection (a) is an ACCA generic burglary type of violent felony, but subsection (b) is not a generic burglary because it is missing the building element because a dwelling does not have to be a building. Further, it is not a violent felony under the force clause. Example continued on next page

33 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Both sets of elements alleged in Taylor/Shepard documents: not enough Example continued: The charging document the only existing Shepard document charges both subsections. Federal sentencing court must assume that defendant pled guilty to subsection (b) the non-qualifying subsection. This is true even if charging document charged both subsections in the conjunctive. See United States v. Vann, 660 F.3d 771 (4 th Cir. 2011) (en banc); Young v. Holder, 697 F.3d 976 (9 th Cir. 2012)

34 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Facts admitted by defendant in plea colloquy conform with both sets of elements: not enough If the charging document, plea, or judgment fail to specify the set of elements to which the defendant pled guilty, but the plea colloquy reflects that the defendant admitted to facts conforming to both sets of elements those that match federal recidivist sentencing predicate definition and those that don t then court must assume defendant pled to non-qualifying elements.

35 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Facts admitted by defendant in plea colloquy conform with both sets of elements: not enough Example: A state burglary statute has two subsections with alternative elements: Subsection (a) requires (1) unlawful entry (2) into building (3) with intent to commit a crime. Subsection (b) requires (1) possession of burglar s tools (2) with intent to commit a crime. Example continued on next page

36 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate See United States v. Marcia-Acosta, 780 F.3d 1244 (9 th Cir. 2015) Facts admitted by defendant in plea colloquy conform with both sets of elements: not enough Example continued: Subsection (a) qualifies as an ACCA generic burglary, but subsection (b) does not because it is missing unlawful entry and building element. Further, subsection (b) does not qualify as a violent felony under the force clause. Thus, modified categorical approach applies. However, subsection to which defendant pled guilty is not specified in the charging document or the plea hearing. Nonetheless, defendant in plea colloquy admitted to breaking into someone s house while carrying burglar s tools with intent to steal a Rolex watch. These facts conform to both subsections. But the non-qualifying subsection is not eliminated; therefore, federal sentencing court must assume defendant pled guilty to non-qualifying subsection.

37 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Defendant entered an Alford plea: not enough If the charging document fails to specify the subset of elements to which a defendant pled guilty, and the defendant enters an Alford plea, federal sentencing court cannot rely on facts in the plea colloquy to determine which of the alternative elements was the basis of the guilty plea. Court must assume that defendant pled guilty to elements that do not qualify as recidivist sentencing enhancement. United States v. Alston, 611 F.3d 219 (4 th Cir. 2010); United States v. Savage, 542 F.3d 959 (2d Cir. 2008); United States v. Vidal, 504 F.3D 1072 (9 th Cir. 2007) (en banc);

38 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Defendant entered an Alford plea: not enough Example: A state assault offense with alternative elements requiring either an offensive physical contact or shooting another with a firearm. The modified categorical approach applies. Offensive physical contact does not qualify as violent felony under ACCA force clause, but shooting another with a firearm does. Example continued on next page

39 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Defendant entered an Alford plea: not enough Example continued: Charging document does not clarify the subset of elements, but defendant enters Alford plea to state assault charge. The state proffers that defendant shot someone with a firearm as basis for plea. Can t rely on factual proffer because Alford plea. Must assume defendant pled guilty to offensive physical contact and prior conviction fails to qualify as violent felony.

40 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Defendant did not assent to factual basis in the plea: not enough If the charging document does not clarify subset of elements, and the defendant s attorney, rather than the defendant himself, assents to the factual basis for the plea, then facts in plea cannot be considered at all in determining whether defendant pled to qualifying elements, and federal sentencing court must assume defendant pled to nonqualifying subset of elements. United States v. Sahagun-Gallegos, 782 F.3d 1094 (9 th Cir. 2015)

41 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Defendant pled guilty to lesser non-qualifying offense: not enough If the charging document alleges elements that match the federal recidivist predicate definition, but the defendant pleads guilty to a lesser included offense that does not have elements matching the federal recidivist predicate definition, then prior conviction does not qualify as a federal recidivist predicate.

42 Taylor/Shepard-approved documents MUST necessarily establish qualifying predicate Defendant pled guilty to lesser non-qualifying offense: not enough Example: Defendant charged with agg. assault that requires intentional stabbing (which has elements equating to ACCA violent felony under force clause) but pleads guilty to simple assault, which requires offensive physical contact (which is lesser included offense that does not have elements equating to ACCA violent felony ). Prior conviction fails to qualify as ACCA violent felony.

43 Step 6 If prior offense does not fit within the always or sometimes categories in steps 3, 4, and 5, then that means prior offense will never qualify as a federal recidivist predicate. Prior offense has no subset of elements that conform with federal recidivist predicate definition.

44 Step 6: Example Assume juvenile is adjudicated under Illinois armed robbery statute that criminalizes robbery by someone who carries on or about his or her person, or is otherwise armed with a dangerous weapon. A prior juvenile adjudication only qualifies as an ACCA violent felony if the prior offense satisfies force clause + use or carrying of a firearm, knife, or destructive device. The Illinois offense never qualifies as violent felony under ACCA because it is missing ACCA firearm, knife, or destructive device element. Illinois dangerous weapon element is broader than ACCA firearm, knife or destructive device requirement. And it is indivisible because although the Illinois statute can be factually violated by use of a firearm, knife, or destructive device, these are factual means - not elements. See United States v. Bankhead, 746 F.3d 323 (8 th Cir. 2014); See also Be careful examples in Step 4.

Post-Descamps World. Paresh Patel, Federal Public Defender, D.Md.

Post-Descamps World. Paresh Patel, Federal Public Defender, D.Md. Post-Descamps World Paresh Patel, Federal Public Defender, D.Md. Descamps v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2276 (June 20, 2013) Clarified when and how to use the modified categorical framework Overview 1.

More information

THE ABC S OF CO AND ACCA FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER CJA PANEL SEMINAR DECEMBER 15, 2017

THE ABC S OF CO AND ACCA FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER CJA PANEL SEMINAR DECEMBER 15, 2017 THE ABC S OF CO AND ACCA FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER CJA PANEL SEMINAR DECEMBER 15, 2017 https://youtu.be/d8cb5wk2t-8 CAREER OFFENDER. WE WILL DISCUSS GENERAL APPLICATION ( 4B1.1) CRIME OF VIOLENCE ( 4B1.2(a))

More information

Case 1:13-cr MC Document 59 Filed 01/11/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION ORDER

Case 1:13-cr MC Document 59 Filed 01/11/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION ORDER Case 1:13-cr-00325-MC Document 59 Filed 01/11/16 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff, No. 1:13-cr-00325-MC

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OPINION Shelton v. USA Doc. 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT CHATTANOOGA MICHAEL J. SHELTON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. No.: 1:18-CV-287-CLC MEMORANDUM

More information

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 16-3764 United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Jonathon Lee Kinney lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

More information

NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, Trevon Sykes - Petitioner. vs. United State of America - Respondent.

NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, Trevon Sykes - Petitioner. vs. United State of America - Respondent. NO. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, 2017 Trevon Sykes - Petitioner vs. United State of America - Respondent. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI Levell D. Littleton Attorney for Petitioner 1221

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 4:16-cr WTM-GRS-1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 4:16-cr WTM-GRS-1 Case: 17-10473 Date Filed: 04/04/2019 Page: 1 of 14 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 17-10473 D.C. Docket No. 4:16-cr-00154-WTM-GRS-1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services Immigration Impact Unit 21 McGrath Highway, Somerville, MA 02143

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services Immigration Impact Unit 21 McGrath Highway, Somerville, MA 02143 The Commonwealth of Massachusetts Committee for Public Counsel Services Immigration Impact Unit 21 McGrath Highway, Somerville, MA 02143 ANTHONY J. BENEDETTI CHIEF COUNSEL TEL: 617-623-0591 FAX: 617-623-0936

More information

Armed Career Criminal and Career Offender Enhancements. If you can t avoid them, deflect them.

Armed Career Criminal and Career Offender Enhancements. If you can t avoid them, deflect them. Armed Career Criminal and Career Offender Enhancements If you can t avoid them, deflect them. ACCA - mandatory 15 year sentence: Who does it apply to? Defendant must: be adjudicated guilty under 18 U.S.C.

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 8:16-cr JDW-AEP-1.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 8:16-cr JDW-AEP-1. Case: 16-16403 Date Filed: 06/23/2017 Page: 1 of 7 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 16-16403 Non-Argument Calendar D.C. Docket No. 8:16-cr-00171-JDW-AEP-1

More information

Matter of Martin CHAIREZ-Castrejon, Respondent

Matter of Martin CHAIREZ-Castrejon, Respondent Matter of Martin CHAIREZ-Castrejon, Respondent Decided February 11, 2015 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals (1) With respect to aggravated felony

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: February 26, 2018 Decided: January 4, 2019 ) Docket No.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT. August Term, (Argued: February 26, 2018 Decided: January 4, 2019 ) Docket No. --cr Shabazz v. United States of America 0 0 0 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 0 (Argued: February, 0 Decided: January, 0 ) Docket No. AL MALIK FRUITKWAN SHABAZZ, fka

More information

Matter of Martin CHAIREZ-Castrejon, Respondent

Matter of Martin CHAIREZ-Castrejon, Respondent Matter of Martin CHAIREZ-Castrejon, Respondent Decided September 28, 2016 U.S. Department of Justice Executive Office for Immigration Review Board of Immigration Appeals The respondent s removability as

More information

Case 3:16-cr BR Document 466 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Case 3:16-cr BR Document 466 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 466 Filed 04/27/16 Page 1 of 10 Per C. Olson, OSB #933863 1000 SW Broadway, Suite 1500 Portland, Oregon 97205 Telephone: Facsimile: (503) 228-7112 Email: per@hoevetlaw.com

More information

Federal Sentencing Guidelines FJC Court Web Alan Dorhoffer Deputy Director, Office of Education

Federal Sentencing Guidelines FJC Court Web Alan Dorhoffer Deputy Director, Office of Education Federal Sentencing Guidelines FJC Court Web Alan Dorhoffer Deputy Director, Office of Education Johnson v. U.S., 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) 2 The Armed Career Criminal Act s residual clause is unconstitutionally

More information

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit 1 pr Stuckey v. United States 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit August Term, 01 No. 1 1 pr SEAN STUCKEY, Petitioner Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

More information

BRIEF FOR PETITIONER

BRIEF FOR PETITIONER No. 11-9540 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States MATTHEW ROBERT DESCAMPS, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT. Appellee, No v. N.D. Okla. JIMMY LEE SHARBUTT, ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT. Appellee, No v. N.D. Okla. JIMMY LEE SHARBUTT, ORDER AND JUDGMENT * UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit August 12, 2008 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, No. 07-5151 v. N.D.

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 19a0059p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT CARLOS CLIFFORD LOWE, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. October Term 2013

No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. October Term 2013 No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES October Term 2013 DANIEL RAUL ESPINOZA, PETITIONER V. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT Case: 16-12626 Date Filed: 06/17/2016 Page: 1 of 9 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS IN RE: JOSEPH ROGERS, JR., FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 16-12626-J Petitioner. Application for Leave to

More information

MICHIGAN OFFENSES WHICH ARE OR ARE NOT CRIMES OF VIOLENCE (AS OF AUGUST 14, 2018) SIXTH CIRCUIT AND EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN CASES PAGE 1

MICHIGAN OFFENSES WHICH ARE OR ARE NOT CRIMES OF VIOLENCE (AS OF AUGUST 14, 2018) SIXTH CIRCUIT AND EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN CASES PAGE 1 AND EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN CASES PAGE 1 Johnson v United States, 135 SCt 2551 (2015) changed the landscape as to what is a crime of violence under ACCA (for felon in possession cases) and under USSG

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND SOUTHERN DIVISION * THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Crim. No. DKC-04-0256 * v. Civil No. * KEVIN KILPATRICK BATEN * * * * * * SUPPLEMENT TO

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 08-1071 LEONEL JIMENEZ-GONZALEZ, v. Petitioner, MICHAEL B. MUKASEY, United States Attorney General, Respondent. Petition for Review of

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit June 16, 2010 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, v. SEREINO

More information

1 18 U.S.C. 924(e) (2012). 2 Id. 924(e)(1). Without the ACCA enhancement, the maximum sentence for a defendant

1 18 U.S.C. 924(e) (2012). 2 Id. 924(e)(1). Without the ACCA enhancement, the maximum sentence for a defendant CRIMINAL LAW ARMED CAREER CRIMINAL ACT EIGHTH CIRCUIT HOLDS THAT GENERIC BURGLARY REQUIRES INTENT AT FIRST MOMENT OF TRESPASS. United States v. McArthur, 850 F.3d 925 (8th Cir. 2017). The Armed Career

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS Case: 3:00-cr-00050-WHR-MRM Doc #: 81 Filed: 06/16/17 Page: 1 of 13 PAGEID #: 472 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

Amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines

Amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines Amendment to the Sentencing Guidelines January 21, 2016 Effective Date August 1, 2016 This document contains unofficial text of an amendment to the Guidelines Manual submitted to Congress, and is provided

More information

Case 3:16-cv ADC Document 6 Filed 04/20/17 Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO

Case 3:16-cv ADC Document 6 Filed 04/20/17 Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO Case 3:16-cv-02368-ADC Document 6 Filed 04/20/17 Page 1 of 9 THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO FERNANDO BAELLA-PABÓN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Civil No. 16-2368

More information

Follow this and additional works at:

Follow this and additional works at: 2014 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 4-4-2014 USA v. Kevin Abbott Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential Docket No. 13-2216 Follow this and additional

More information

United States Court of Appeals

United States Court of Appeals 15 1518 cr United States v. Jones In the United States Court of Appeals For the Second Circuit AUGUST TERM, 2015 ARGUED: APRIL 27, 2016 DECIDED: JULY 21, 2016 No. 15 1518 cr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Case: 12-40877 Document: 00512661408 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/12/2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED

More information

Crimes of Violence Updates. Michael Dwyer and Brocca Morrison Office of the Federal Public Defender, EDMO

Crimes of Violence Updates. Michael Dwyer and Brocca Morrison Office of the Federal Public Defender, EDMO Crimes of Violence Updates Michael Dwyer and Brocca Morrison Office of the Federal Public Defender, EDMO United States v. Naylor, 887 F.3d 397 (8th Cir. 2018) United States v. Naylor, 887 F.3d 397 (8th

More information

Impact of Immigration on Families: Intersection of Immigration and Criminal Law. Judicial Training Network Albuquerque, New Mexico April 20, 2018

Impact of Immigration on Families: Intersection of Immigration and Criminal Law. Judicial Training Network Albuquerque, New Mexico April 20, 2018 Impact of Immigration on Families: Intersection of Immigration and Criminal Law Judicial Training Network Albuquerque, New Mexico April 20, 2018 Judicial Training Network 1 Introductions David B. Thronson

More information

When a State Felony is not A Federal Felony. Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder

When a State Felony is not A Federal Felony. Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder When a State Felony is not A Federal Felony Carachuri-Rosendo v. Holder Federal Felony Definition, generally: a conviction punishable by a term that exceeds one year imprisonment If the term exceeding

More information

In the Supreme Court of the United States

In the Supreme Court of the United States No. 15-6092 In the Supreme Court of the United States RICHARD MATHIS, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT BRIEF FOR

More information

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TREVON SYKES, PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TREVON SYKES, PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA No. 16-9604 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TREVON SYKES, PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON Case :-cr-000-sab Document Filed 0/0/ 0 0 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOHN BRANNON SUTTLE III, Defendant. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON NO. :-cr-000-sab ORDER

More information

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS. Johnson Update LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER DECEMBER 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE

DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS. Johnson Update LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER DECEMBER 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE DEFENSE LINK MONTHLY NEWSLETTER FOR CJA PANEL ATTORNEYS LEIGH M. SKIPPER, CHIEF FEDERAL DEFENDER DECEMBER 2017 INSIDE THIS ISSUE Johnson Update Page 1 Recent Third Circuit and Supreme Court Cases Page

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. ) ) v.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. ) ) v. Case :-cr-00-ghk Document Filed 0/0/ Page of Page ID #: 0 0 SEAN K. KENNEDY (No. Federal Public Defender (E-mail: Sean_Kennedy@fd.org FIRDAUS F. DORDI (No. (E-mail: Firdaus_Dordi@fd.org Deputy Federal

More information

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 17 757 cr United States v. Townsend In the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit AUGUST TERM 2017 No. 17 757 cr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. TYREK TOWNSEND, Defendant Appellant.

More information

The Need for Sneed: A Loophole in the Armed Career Criminal Act

The Need for Sneed: A Loophole in the Armed Career Criminal Act Boston College Law Review Volume 52 Issue 6 Volume 52 E. Supp.: Annual Survey of Federal En Banc and Other Significant Cases Article 15 4-1-2011 The Need for Sneed: A Loophole in the Armed Career Criminal

More information

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Case: 15-40264 Document: 00513225763 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/08/2015 No. 15-40264 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. RAYMOND ESTRADA,

More information

JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES, 135 S. Ct (2015): Its Impact and Implications

JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES, 135 S. Ct (2015): Its Impact and Implications JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015): Its Impact and Implications October 8, 2015 Paresh S. Patel Federal Public Defender, District of Maryland Jennifer Coffin Sentencing Resource Counsel I.

More information

NO MORE SIMPLE BATTERY IN WEST VIRGINIA: THE NEWLY AMENDED AND Katherine Moore*

NO MORE SIMPLE BATTERY IN WEST VIRGINIA: THE NEWLY AMENDED AND Katherine Moore* 21 WEST VIRGINIA LAW REVIEW ONLINE [Vol. 1 NO MORE SIMPLE BATTERY IN WEST VIRGINIA: THE NEWLY AMENDED 61-2-9 AND 61-2-28 Katherine Moore* I. INTRODUCTION... 21 II. UNITED STATES V. WHITE... 21 A. The Fourth

More information

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Case: 14-30168, 09/22/2015, ID: 9692783, DktEntry: 39, Page 1 of 24 No. 14-30168 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, EDDIE RAY STRICKLAND,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cr JLK-1. versus

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cr JLK-1. versus Case: 16-12951 Date Filed: 04/06/2017 Page: 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT No. 16-12951 D.C. Docket No. 1:15-cr-20815-JLK-1 [DO NOT PUBLISH] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

More information

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case Number BC v. Honorable David M.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION. Plaintiff, Case Number BC v. Honorable David M. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN NORTHERN DIVISION Plaintiff, Case Number 03-20028-BC v. Honorable David M. Lawson DERRICK GIBSON, Defendant. / OPINION

More information

Case 3:16-cr BR Document 671 Filed 06/10/16 Page 1 of 16

Case 3:16-cr BR Document 671 Filed 06/10/16 Page 1 of 16 Case 3:16-cr-00051-BR Document 671 Filed 06/10/16 Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff, AMMON BUNDY, JON RITZHEIMER, JOSEPH

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA Filed 12/21/17 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE, ) ) Plaintiff and Respondent, ) ) S231260 v. ) ) Ct.App. 2/6 B257357 SULMA MARILYN GALLARDO, ) ) Los Angeles County Defendant and Appellant.

More information

No. l S-6092 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, vs. United States of America - Respondent.

No. l S-6092 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, vs. United States of America - Respondent. No. l S-6092 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2014 Richard Mathis - Petitioner, vs. United States of America - Respondent. upteme Court, Ptt..Eo SEP 1520i5 Motion For Leave to Proceed

More information

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF Appellate Case: 13-1466 Document: 01019479219 Date Filed: 08/21/2015 Page: 1 No. 13-1466 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, RANDY

More information

Case 3:17-cr SI Document 67 Filed 11/28/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON

Case 3:17-cr SI Document 67 Filed 11/28/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON Case 3:17-cr-00431-SI Document 67 Filed 11/28/18 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. DAT QUOC DO, Case No. 3:17-cr-431-SI OPINION AND

More information

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1282

CHAPTER Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1282 CHAPTER 97-69 Committee Substitute for Senate Bill No. 1282 An act relating to imposition of adult sanctions upon children; amending s. 39.059, F.S., relating to community control or commitment of children

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. No (D.C. Nos. 1:16-CV LH-CG and ALFONSO THOMPSON,

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT. No (D.C. Nos. 1:16-CV LH-CG and ALFONSO THOMPSON, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit January 9, 2018 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court Plaintiff - Appellee,

More information

DESCAMPS V. UNITED STATES AND THE MODIFIED CATEGORICAL APPROACH

DESCAMPS V. UNITED STATES AND THE MODIFIED CATEGORICAL APPROACH DESCAMPS V. UNITED STATES AND THE MODIFIED CATEGORICAL APPROACH 119 120 PRACTICE ADVISORY * July 17, 2013 DESCAMPS V. UNITED STATES AND THE MODIFIED CATEGORICAL APPROACH INTRODUCTION [A]n inferior court

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Cite as: 544 U. S. (2005) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of

More information

4B1.1 GUIDELINES MANUAL November 1, 2014

4B1.1 GUIDELINES MANUAL November 1, 2014 4B1.1 GUIDELINES MANUAL November 1, 2014 PART B - CAREER OFFENDERS AND CRIMINAL LIVELIHOOD 4B1.1. Career Offender (a) (b) A defendant is a career offender if (1) the defendant was at least eighteen years

More information

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS APPELLEE

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF FOR THE UNITED STATES AS APPELLEE Case: 13-10650, 08/17/2015, ID: 9649625, DktEntry: 42, Page 1 of 19 No. 13-10650 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GERRIELL ELLIOTT TALMORE, Defendant-Appellant.

More information

Updated: 6/15/11. Career Offender Cases (chronologically)

Updated: 6/15/11. Career Offender Cases (chronologically) Career Offender Cases (chronologically) Updated: 6/15/11 Supreme Court to decide if second or subsequent possession offense is an "aggravated felony." Under federal law, an "aggravated felony" is defined

More information

No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER 2011 TERM. RICARDO MARRERO, Petitioner. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent

No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER 2011 TERM. RICARDO MARRERO, Petitioner. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER 2011 TERM RICARDO MARRERO, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent MOTION FOR LEAVE TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS Petitioner, Ricardo Marrero,

More information

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA AUGUSTA DIVISION CHARLES ANTHONY DAVIS, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) CV 119-015 ) (Formerly CR 110-041) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

More information

No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, JERRY N. BROWN, Petitioner, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, JERRY N. BROWN, Petitioner, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. No. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OCTOBER TERM, 2017 JERRY N. BROWN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

More information

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS

BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE EXECUTIVE OFFICE FOR IMMIGRATION REVIEW BOARD OF IMMIGRATION APPEALS In the matter of: Association, Immigrant Defense Project, and the National Immigration

More information

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No

PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. No PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 18-6070 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. Plaintiff Appellee, JAMES ERIC JONES, Defendant Appellant. Appeal from the United States District

More information

FEDERAL REPORTER, 3d SERIES

FEDERAL REPORTER, 3d SERIES 964 771 FEDERAL REPORTER, 3d SERIES V. For the foregoing reasons, we AFFIRM the judgment of the district court., UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff Appellee, v. Derrick Montez BALL, Defendant Appellant.

More information

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit No. 11-2444 United States of America llllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee v. Alfred Tucker lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant No. 11-2489

More information

Date Jan. 5, 2016 Original X Amendment Prepared: Bill No: HB 037 Correction Substitute. APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands)

Date Jan. 5, 2016 Original X Amendment Prepared: Bill No: HB 037 Correction Substitute. APPROPRIATION (dollars in thousands) LFC Requester: AGENCY BILL ANALYSIS 2016 REGULAR SESSION WITHIN 24 HOURS OF BILL POSTING, EMAIL ANALYSIS TO: LFC@NMLEGIS.GOV and DFA@STATE.NM.US {Include the bill no. in the email subject line, e.g., HB2,

More information

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 110,245. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, JEFF DICKEY, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. No. 110,245. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, JEFF DICKEY, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 110,245 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. JEFF DICKEY, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. K.S.A. 22-3504(1) specifically authorizes a court to "correct an illegal

More information

Sentencing Factors that Limit Judicial Discretion and Influence Plea Bargaining

Sentencing Factors that Limit Judicial Discretion and Influence Plea Bargaining Sentencing Factors that Limit Judicial Discretion and Influence Plea Bargaining Catherine P. Adkisson Assistant Solicitor General Colorado Attorney General s Office Although all classes of felonies have

More information

Particular Crimes can be grouped under 3 headings: Crimes against people Crimes against property Crimes against business interests

Particular Crimes can be grouped under 3 headings: Crimes against people Crimes against property Crimes against business interests Criminal Law Particular Crimes can be grouped under 3 headings: Crimes against people Crimes against property Crimes against business interests Crimes Against People Murder unlawful killing of another

More information

Incapacitating Dangerous Repeat Offenders (or Not): Evidentiary Restrictions on Armed Career Criminal Act Sentencing in United States v.

Incapacitating Dangerous Repeat Offenders (or Not): Evidentiary Restrictions on Armed Career Criminal Act Sentencing in United States v. Boston College Law Review Volume 59 Issue 9 Electronic Supplement Article 20 4-26-2018 Incapacitating Dangerous Repeat Offenders (or Not): Evidentiary Restrictions on Armed Career Criminal Act Sentencing

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 206 File Name: 06a0116p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. CARSON BEASLEY, Plaintiff-Appellee,

More information

Case 3:15-cr EMC Document 83 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA I.

Case 3:15-cr EMC Document 83 Filed 06/07/16 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA I. Case :-cr-00-emc Document Filed 0/0/ Page of UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. KEVIN BAIRES-REYES, Defendant. Case No. -cr-00-emc- ORDER

More information

IMPACT OF CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS

IMPACT OF CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS IMPACT OF CRIMINAL CONVICTIONS ERICH C. STRAUB ERICH@STRAUBIMMIGRATION.COM SARAH ROSE WEINMAN SWEINMAN@HEARTLANDALLIANCE.ORG American Bar Association - Immigration Pro Bono Training August 1, 2012 Chicago,

More information

Three Strikes and You're Out Maybe: "Violent Felonies" and the Armed Career Criminal Act in United States v. Vann

Three Strikes and You're Out Maybe: Violent Felonies and the Armed Career Criminal Act in United States v. Vann Boston College Law Review Volume 54 Issue 6 Electronic Supplement Article 16 4-22-2013 Three Strikes and You're Out Maybe: "Violent Felonies" and the Armed Career Criminal Act in United States v. Vann

More information

A USER S GUIDE TO MATTER OF SILVA-TREVINO

A USER S GUIDE TO MATTER OF SILVA-TREVINO 13 Bender s Immigration Bulletin 1568 A USER S GUIDE TO MATTER OF SILVA-TREVINO BY ANN ATALLA Crimes involving moral turpitude have been a problematic area of immigration law for decades, largely due to

More information

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 114,107 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, ROBERT JOE BARNES, Appellant.

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION. No. 114,107 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS. STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, ROBERT JOE BARNES, Appellant. NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION No. 114,107 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. ROBERT JOE BARNES, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Appeal from Finney District Court;

More information

with Ron, Tammy & Fritz

with Ron, Tammy & Fritz The 2015-16 Third Circuit Update & A Primer on Johnson and its Aftermath with Ron, Tammy & Fritz Where Have All The Oral Arguments and Opinions Gone? Guess which circuit holds the fewest oral arguments?

More information

Colorado Legislative Council Staff

Colorado Legislative Council Staff Colorado Legislative Council Staff Distributed to CCJJ, November 9, 2017 Room 029 State Capitol, Denver, CO 80203-1784 (303) 866-3521 FAX: 866-3855 TDD: 866-3472 leg.colorado.gov/lcs E-mail: lcs.ga@state.co.us

More information

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and M. J. Lord, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, and M. J. Lord, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA LESLIE WILLIAMS, v. Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D05-3713

More information

JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES, 135 S. Ct (2015): Its Impact and Implications

JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES, 135 S. Ct (2015): Its Impact and Implications JOHNSON V. UNITED STATES, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015): Its Impact and Implications November 12, 2015 Paresh S. Patel, Federal Public Defender, D. Maryland I. Pre-Johnson world Overview II. Summary of Johnson

More information

COLLEGE OF CENTRAL FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

COLLEGE OF CENTRAL FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE COLLEGE OF CENTRAL FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE Title: Limited Access Programs Admission: Criminal Background Restrictions Page 1 of 4 Implementing Procedure for Policy #: 7.00 Date Approved: 8/16/06

More information

Appendix A Selected Immigration Consequences of North Carolina Offenses

Appendix A Selected Immigration Consequences of North Carolina Offenses Appendix A Selected Immigration Consequences of rth Carolina The chart analyzes the potential likelihood of removal based on conviction of selected rth Carolina offenses. Additional immigration consequences

More information

Mens Rea Defect Overturns 15 Year Enhancement

Mens Rea Defect Overturns 15 Year Enhancement Mens Rea Defect Overturns 15 Year Enhancement Felony Urination with Intent Three Strikes Yer Out Darryl Jones came to Spokane, Washington in Spring, 1991 to help a friend move. A police officer observed

More information

Uses of State Criminal Court Records in Immigration Proceedings

Uses of State Criminal Court Records in Immigration Proceedings Uses of State Criminal Court Records in Immigration Proceedings Steven Weller John A. Martin July 2011 Center for Public Policy Studies State court criminal case records routinely provide the information

More information

The defendant has been charged with first degree murder.

The defendant has been charged with first degree murder. Page 1 of 11 206.14 FIRST DEGREE MURDER - MURDER COMMITTED IN PERPETRATION OF A FELONY 1 OR MURDER WITH PREMEDITATION AND DELIBERATION WHERE A DEADLY WEAPON IS USED. CLASS A FELONY (DEATH OR LIFE IMPRISONMENT);

More information

USA v. Earnest Matthew Doc Att. 1. Case: Document: 31-2 Filed: 05/08/2017 Page: 1

USA v. Earnest Matthew Doc Att. 1. Case: Document: 31-2 Filed: 05/08/2017 Page: 1 USA v. Earnest Matthew Doc. 6013069388 Att. 1 Case: 15-2298 Document: 31-2 Filed: 05/08/2017 Page: 1 NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 17a0260n.06 No. 15-2298 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CHRISTOPHER JOHNSON, Defendant-Appellant. No. 18-10016 D.C. No. 2:17-cr-00057- JCM-CWH-1

More information

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT CARLOS ALBERTO FLORES-LOPEZ, AKA Carlos Alberto Flores, AKA Carlos Flores-Lopez, Petitioner, No. 08-75140 v. Agency No. A43-738-693

More information

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Cite as: 563 U. S. (2011) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of

More information

SCHEDULE OF LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES COMMENT ON SCHEDULE OF LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES

SCHEDULE OF LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES COMMENT ON SCHEDULE OF LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSES SCHEDULE OF LESSER INCLUDED COMMENT ON SCHEDULE OF LESSER INCLUDED One of the difficult problems in instructing a criminal jury is to make certain that it is properly charged with respect to the degrees

More information

VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY SESSION

VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY SESSION VIRGINIA ACTS OF ASSEMBLY -- 2015 SESSION CHAPTER 691 An Act to amend and reenact 9.1-902, 17.1-805, 18.2-46.1, 18.2-356, 18.2-357, 18.2-513, 19.2-215.1, and 19.2-386.35 of the Code of Virginia and to

More information

Introduction to Criminal Law

Introduction to Criminal Law Winter 2019 Introduction to Criminal Law Recognizing Offenses Shoplifting equals Larceny Criminal possession of stolen property. Punching someone might be Assault; or Harassment; or Menacing Recognizing

More information

UNITED STATES V. MOBLEY: ANOTHER FAILURE IN CRIME OF VIOLENCE ANALYSIS

UNITED STATES V. MOBLEY: ANOTHER FAILURE IN CRIME OF VIOLENCE ANALYSIS UNITED STATES V. MOBLEY: ANOTHER FAILURE IN CRIME OF VIOLENCE ANALYSIS Samantha Rutsky I. Introduction... 852 II. Background... 853 A. The History and Use of the United States Sentencing Guidelines 4B1.1-1.2

More information

Preliminary Advisory on Nijhawan v. Holder

Preliminary Advisory on Nijhawan v. Holder Preliminary Advisory on Nijhawan v. Holder Kathy Brady, Immigrant Legal Resource Center This is a preliminary advisory on the Supreme Court s decision in Nijhawan v. Holder, 557 U.S. (2009), 2009 U.S.

More information

Finding Intent Without Mens Rea: A Modified Categorical Approach to Sentencing Under the United States Sentencing Guidelines

Finding Intent Without Mens Rea: A Modified Categorical Approach to Sentencing Under the United States Sentencing Guidelines Seventh Circuit Review Volume 5 Issue 1 Article 4 9-1-2009 Finding Intent Without Mens Rea: A Modified Categorical Approach to Sentencing Under the United States Sentencing Guidelines Amanda J. Schackart

More information

Assessing Divisibility in the Armed Career Criminal Act

Assessing Divisibility in the Armed Career Criminal Act Michigan Law Review Volume 110 Issue 8 2012 Assessing Divisibility in the Armed Career Criminal Act Ted Koehler University of Michigan Law School Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr

More information

Washington University Law Review

Washington University Law Review Washington University Law Review Volume 73 Issue 4 January 1995 Attempted Burglary As a Violent Felony Under the Armed Career Criminal Act: Avoiding a Serious Potential Risk of Confusion in the Wake of

More information

UPDATE: Using the California Chart and Notes After Moncrieffe v. Holder and Olivas-Motta v. Holder

UPDATE: Using the California Chart and Notes After Moncrieffe v. Holder and Olivas-Motta v. Holder UPDATE: Using the California Chart and Notes After Moncrieffe v. Holder and Olivas-Motta v. Holder Kathy Brady and Su Yon Yi, ILRC June 6, 2013 Two important cases have changed the immigration consequences

More information