United States v. Douglas, No. 18-1129 (1st Cir. 2018)Annotate this Case
At issue was whether it is appropriate to use the categorical approach in determining what is a “crime of violence” under 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(3)(b).
The First Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Appellant’s motion, before he entered a conditional plea of guilty to using, carrying, or brandishing a firearm in relation to a “crime of violence” in violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1), to dismiss a portion of the charge on the ground that the residual clause at 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague under Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), and Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018). The First Circuit held that section 924(c)(3)(B) is not void for vagueness because the statute reasonably allows for a case-specific approach rather than a categorical approach and because Appellant’s conspiracy to commit a Hobbs Act robbery qualified as a “crime of violence.”
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on October 19, 2018.