No. 22-5610

Andre Thompson v. United States

Lower Court: Third Circuit
Docketed: 2022-09-19
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: categorical-approach civil-rights criminal-law criminal-statute due-process elements-clause physical-force sentencing statutory-interpretation
Latest Conference: 2022-10-14
Question Presented (from Petition)

i) 14I approach od \% US. Cf fcj U) CA)
Courts allowed or retired b look to the
J wlort it ordinarily invo
Jicab crime ad i/ioknce fpplymj jit Catz^ en a
-* the clemtnh clause , areatica
lytSj Kilnn deterrninihj id n ovf u/.e od.an.o
that offnstdfense
l idlesan
06 (X pre fyUtk
l4en applying ftCortegoriaal approach of \% U.S.C.. $ ?.M(c/C3XAj /lowed to determine id fl,c the elements ciausi
elements of a/i offensecourts t'cc^uirtd are or a-)■
los as an element tl /"e <pir.es )-J.n i/oIvZS
in stead of determining i f 4-lz offense itself I>
od physical -force.. od e ustj,. or
physical dorez as as an,
element fhe use/ > • •

Question Presented (AI Summary)

When applying the categorical approach of 18 U.S.C. §924(c), the elements clause, are courts allowed or required to look to the nature of an offense and what it ordinarily involves, when determining whether that offense qualifies as a predicate crime of violence?

Docket Entries

2022-10-17
Petition DENIED.
2022-09-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/14/2022.
2022-09-26
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2022-09-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due October 19, 2022)

Attorneys

Andre Thompson
Andre Thompson — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent