United States v. Prigan, No. 18-30238 (9th Cir. 2021)
Annotate this Case
In 2014, Prigan pleaded guilty to two counts of Hobbs Act robbery, 18 U.S.C. 1951. Prigan served three years in prison and was released on supervised release. Prigan’s supervised-release conditions and conviction for Hobbs Act robbery prohibited him from possessing any firearm or ammunition. In 2018, federal officers searched Prigan’s residence and vehicle. They found firearms, ammunition, and methamphetamine. He pleaded guilty as a felon and unlawful user of controlled substances who possessed firearms and ammunition, 18 U.S.C. 922(g)(1), 922(g)(3), and 924(a)(2), and with possessing an unregistered firearm , 26 U.S.C. 5841. The PSR stated that Prigan’s 2014 conviction for Hobbs Act robbery constituted a crime of violence under Guidelines section 4B1.2(a), which increased Prigan’s Guidelines range from 46-57 months of imprisonment to 57-71 months. The district court overruled Prigan’s objections.
The Ninth Circuit vacated his 64-month sentence, joining six other circuits in holding that Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence under section 4B1.2(a). Examining the enumerated offenses in that section, the court concluded that Hobbs Act robbery sweeps more broadly than the “force clause,” “robbery,” and “extortion.”
Court Description: Criminal Law The panel vacated a sentence for illegally possessing firearms, and remanded for resentencing, in a case in which the district court determined that the defendant’s prior conviction for Hobbs Act robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 1951(b)(1) is a “crime of violence” under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 4B1.2(a). The panel held that Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence under § 4B1.2(a). The panel explained that Hobbs Act robbery, which covers using force or threatening to use force against persons or property, sweeps more broadly than § 4B1.2(a)’s force clause, § 4B1.2(a)’s enumerated offense of robbery, and § 4B1.2(a)’s enumerated offense of extortion—none of whose crime-of-violence definitions covers using force or threatening force against property. The panel held that the district court therefore erred in ruling that Hobbs Act robbery is categorically a crime of violence. The panel held that the error is not harmless, because the district court provided no explanation for varying from the correct Guidelines range, let alone the extent of such variance. UNITED STATES V. PRIGAN 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.