United States v. Adkins, No. 15-10566 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThe Ninth Circuit affirmed defendant's conviction and sentence for committing a violent crime in aid of racketeering. The panel held that the district court committed harmless error by instructing the jury on the federal definition of "knowingly," which lacked a self-defense instruction, rather than on the Hawaii definition. The panel also held that defendant's prior burglary and false imprisonment convictions qualified as crimes of violence under USSG 4B1.2's residual clause.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed a conviction and sentence for a Violent Crime in Aid of Racketeering under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1959(a)(3), (2). The panel held that the district court erred when it instructed the jury on the federal definition of “knowingly,” which lacked a self-defense instruction, rather than on the Hawaii definition. The panel held that the error was harmless. The panel held that the Sentencing Commission’s deletion of the residual clause in the career offender guideline, U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a), was a substantive rather than clarifying amendment, and that the residual clause therefore applies to the defendant, who was sentenced prior to the amendment. The panel held that the defendant’s prior Hawaii convictions for unlawful imprisonment in the first degree and burglary in the first degree qualify as crimes of violence under the residual clause. UNITED STATES V. ADKINS 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.