A jury convicted Cristian Serrano-Delgado of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c) and (j) based on instructions providing various possible crime-of-violence predicates. These included, within the same § 924(c) counts, conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act Robbery, Hobbs Act robbery based on Pinkerton conspiracy, and aiding and abetting of Hobbs Act robbery. Under Davis, conspiracy is not a crime of violence, and Pinkerton-liability-based Hobbs Act robbery has not been assessed by this Court. The question presented is:

Can a valid Section 924(c) conviction be based on jury findings that may have been based on Hobbs Act conspiracy, Pinkerton Hobbs Act conspiracy, and aiding and abetting when those offenses require no proof of the requisite violent force?

Can a valid Section 924(c) conviction be based on jury findings that may have been based on Hobbs Act conspiracy, Pinkerton Hobbs Act conspiracy, and aiding and abetting when those offenses require no proof of the requisite violent force?