No. 25-13
Marcellus Henderson v. United States
Relisted (2)
Experienced Counsel
Tags: bank-robbery crime-of-violence divisible-statute elements-clause federal-statute sentencing-enhancement
Latest Conference:
2025-11-14
(distributed 2 times)
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Is federal bank robbery in § 2113(a) indivisible, such that no form of bank robbery qualifies as a "crime of violence" for purposes of § 924(c)?
2. If the statute is divisible, did the Eleventh Circuit err in holding that attempted federal bank robbery necessarily includes "the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force," such that it qualifies as a "crime of violence" for purposes of § 924(c)?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Is federal bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) a 'crime of violence' for purposes of enhanced sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)?
Docket Entries
2025-11-17
Petition DENIED.
2025-10-29
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/14/2025.
2025-09-25
Rescheduled.
2025-09-17
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/10/2025.
2025-09-15
Reply of Marcellus Henderson submitted.
2025-09-15
Reply of petitioner Marcellus Henderson filed.
2025-09-03
Brief of United States in opposition submitted.
2025-09-03
Brief of respondent United States in opposition filed.
2025-07-30
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including September 3, 2025.
2025-07-29
Motion of United States for an extension of time submitted.
2025-07-29
Motion to extend the time to file a response from August 4, 2025 to September 3, 2025, submitted to The Clerk.
2025-07-01
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 4, 2025)
Attorneys
Marcellus Henderson
E. Joshua Rosenkranz — Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Petitioner
United States
D. John Sauer — Solicitor General, Respondent
Moez Mansoor Kaba — Hueston Hennigan LLP, Respondent