No. 19-6309
Charles Benton Bagwell v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 18-usc-2113 18-usc-924 armed-bank-robbery categorical-approach crime-of-violence elements-clause federal-armed-bank-robbery intentional-force intentional-use-of-force statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Takings Securities
Takings Securities
Latest Conference:
2019-11-15
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether federal armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) can be a crime of violence under the elements clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) when the offense fails to require any intentional use, attempted use, or threat of violent physical force?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether federal armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) can be a crime of violence under the elements clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) when the offense fails to require any intentional use, attempted use, or threat of violent physical force?
Docket Entries
2019-11-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-10-31
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/15/2019.
2019-10-24
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2019-10-16
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 18, 2019)
Attorneys
Charles Benton Bagwell
Melissa Winberg — Federal Defender Services of Idaho, Inc., Petitioner
United States
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent