United States v. Elvin Hill, No. 14-3872-cr (Circuit Judges: Jacobs, Livingston, and Droney).(Disclosure: This is an appeal that this Office litigated). In this direct appeal, Mr. Hill argued: (1) that Hobbs Act robbery (18 U.S.C. § 1951) did not “categorically” constitute a “crime of violence” under the “force” clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3); and … Read more
Johnson (Bad) News: Today, the Circuit decided Hill adverse to the defendant. It holds that Hobbs Act Robbery is “categorically” a “Crime of Violence” under 18 U.S.C.§ 924(c)(3). It also holds that Johnson does not apply to § 924(c): i.e., it does not “effectively render[] the ‘risk-of-force clause’” of § 924(c) “void for vagueness.” United … Read more
United States v. Celaj, No. 10-2792-cr (2d Cir. August 22, 2011)(Miner, Cabranes, Straub, CJJ) Din Celaj headed a crew that would rob – or try to rob – drug dealers. When successful, they would obtain drugs, which they would themselves sell, money and firearms. He went to trial on several Hobbs Act robbery and associated … Read more
United States v. Markle, No. 06-1600-cr (2d Cir. December 14, 2010) (Jacobs, Pooler, Parker, CJJ) In United States v. Enmons, 410 U.S. 396 (1973), the Supreme Court held that extortion liability under the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, did not extend to violence in pursuit of “legitimate labor ends” that occurs during a lawful … Read more
United States v. Parkes, No. 05-1486-cr (2d Cir. August 15, 2007) (Jacobs, McLaughlin, Calabresi, CJJ). In a sterling example of the alchemy of result-oriented jurisprudence, here the court finds sufficient evidence of an effect on interstate commerce, even though there was none. Otis Parkes and two others planned and carried out 2003 robbery attempt in … Read more