US v. Strickland, No. 14-30168
(6-26-17)(Kozinski w/Fisher & Watford). This is another
"categorical" decision. The
9th holds that a conviction for third degree robbery under Oregon law is not a
violent felony for ACCA purposes.
In Johnson, 135 S. Ct 2551 (2015), the Court found the residual clause of clause of 924(e)(2)(B) constitutionally vague. The government argues though that robbery would be a predicate offense under the "force" clause. The 9th will have none of it. Oregon State cases do not require physical force for third degree robbery. Thus, under the categorical approach, it is not a force predicate.
Congrats to Elizabeth Daily and Steve Sady of the Oregon FPD for its amicus brief.
In Johnson, 135 S. Ct 2551 (2015), the Court found the residual clause of clause of 924(e)(2)(B) constitutionally vague. The government argues though that robbery would be a predicate offense under the "force" clause. The 9th will have none of it. Oregon State cases do not require physical force for third degree robbery. Thus, under the categorical approach, it is not a force predicate.
Congrats to Elizabeth Daily and Steve Sady of the Oregon FPD for its amicus brief.
The decision is here:
http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/06/26/14-30168.pdf
posted by Jon Sands at 6/26/2017 02:42:00 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home