These summaries are not intended as legal advice. Please contact a licensed attorney to discuss the specifics of your case.
Viewing entries tagged
crime of violence
The Eighth Circuit has vacated a felon-in-possession sentence enhanced based on a prior Texas robbery conviction, holding that the offense does not qualify as a crime of violence because it can be committed with a reckless mental state.
The full text of United States v. Benavidez can be found here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/09/252497P.pdf
The Eighth Circuit has vacated a felon-in-possession sentence enhanced based on prior felony convictions for forcibly assaulting federal officers, holding that a felony conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1) does not categorically require the violent physical force needed to qualify as a Sentencing Guidelines crime of violence.
The Court held that the statute's felony tier can be satisfied by mere intentional and offensive physical contact that a reasonable person would find objectionable, without any showing that the contact was capable of causing pain or injury, distinguishing the offense from other assault statutes requiring proof that the victim was placed in fear of imminent bodily harm. The Court remanded for resentencing under a corrected Guidelines range.
The full text of United States v. McIntosh can be found here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/08/252394P.pdf
The Eleventh Circuit has affirmed a felon-in-possession sentence enhanced based on a prior Florida felony battery conviction, holding that its en banc decision in United States v. Vail-Bailon survives the Supreme Court's later plurality decision in Borden v. United States.
The Court held that only Justice Thomas's separate opinion in Borden, which commanded four votes short of a majority, would require that a defendant have specifically intended the resulting harm, whereas the controlling plurality opinion asked only whether the offense requires a purposeful or knowing act directed at another person. Because Florida felony battery requires an intentional touch or strike, it remains a categorical match regardless of whether the resulting "great bodily harm" was itself intended or merely negligently caused.
The full text of United States v. Sheely can be found here: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202413967.pdf
The Eighth Circuit has affirmed a felon-in-possession sentence enhanced based on a prior Missouri conviction for unlawfully exhibiting a weapon in an angry or threatening manner, rejecting the defendant's argument that the Supreme Court's decision in Delligatti v. United States undermined circuit precedent holding the offense a crime of violence.
The Court held that its prior decision in United States v. Pulliam already recognized, consistent with Delligatti, that the object of the required force must be a person, and that Missouri's own courts have equated exhibiting a weapon in the presence of others with an assault against those bystanders. The Court also found no clear error in the district court's identification of the specific subdivision of the divisible Missouri statute underlying the defendant's plea.
The full text of United States v. Verges can be found here: https://ecf.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/26/08/252033P.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has vacated a sentence enhanced under the career-offender Sentencing Guideline based on two prior convictions for inflicting corporal injury on a domestic partner under California Penal Code § 273.5, holding that the offense no longer categorically qualifies as a crime of violence.
Applying Borden v. United States and its own recent en banc decision in United States v. Gomez, the Court held that § 273.5 requires only the intent to commit the assaultive act, not intent or knowledge that force be directed at another person, and therefore does not satisfy the requirement of a mens rea greater than recklessness. The Court expressly overruled its prior precedent holding § 273.5 categorically a crime of violence as clearly irreconcilable with intervening authority and remanded for resentencing.
The full text of United States v. Lopez can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/07/28/24-3268.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has partly granted a habeas petition filed by a man convicted of hiring a hit man to murder two business associates, holding that his solicitation convictions tied to those killings cannot stand because murder-for-hire resulting in death is not categorically a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 373(a).
The Court held that while the death-results element of the murder-for-hire statute likely satisfies the physical force requirement, it lacks any mens rea requirement and can be satisfied by an accidental killing, meaning it does not categorically require the intentional use of force needed to qualify as a crime of violence.
The full text of United States v. Henrikson can be found here: https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/07/15/23-2132.pdf
The Eleventh Circuit has affirmed in part and vacated in part a sentence for a felon-in-possession conviction. The Court found no plain error in treating Florida attempted carjacking as a crime of violence for guideline purposes, relying on Florida robbery and carjacking precedent and the Sentencing Commission’s treatment of attempts.
The full text of United States v. Irons can be found here: https://media.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/files/202412112.pdf
The First Circuit has determined that Massachusetts carjacking does not categorically qualify as a crime of violence under the career-offender guideline. The defendant challenged his enhanced sentence, arguing that the Massachusetts offense can be committed without the level of violent force required by the federal force clause.
The Court agreed, finding that Massachusetts assault can be committed by an offensive touching and that the carjacking statute’s additional elements did not necessarily require violent physical force. Although the case arose in the criminal sentencing context, the categorical analysis may be useful to immigration practitioners assessing Massachusetts carjacking convictions in removal proceedings.
The full text of United States v. Pimental can be found here: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/opnfiles/24-1910P-01A.pdf
The First Circuit has determined that a Virginia conviction for use of a firearm is a crime of violence because it requires “using a firearm while overcoming the victim by violence or intimidation.”
The full text of United States v. Mao can be found here: https://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/sites/ca1/files/opnfiles/24-2107P-01A.pdf
The Fifth Circuit has rejected an argument that a Louisiana conviction for armed robbery is not a crime of violence because it can be committed recklessly.
The full text of United States v. Lanaute can be found here: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/25/25-30266-CR0.pdf
The Tenth Circuit has determined that an Oklahoma conviction for assault and battery with a dangerous weapon is not categorically a crime of violence because it criminalizes assault on an unborn child.
The full text of United States v. Singer can be found here:
https://www.ca10.uscourts.gov/sites/ca10/files/opinions/010111374543.pdf
The Third Circuit has determined that a conviction for attempted murder of a federal witness is a crime of violence because the government must necessarily prove that the defendant at least attempted to use physical force.
The full text of U.S. v. Smith can be found here:
The Sixth Circuit has determined that a Kentucky conviction for first-degree burglary is not a crime of violence because it encompasses flight from a scene while armed, which does not necessarily involve the threat of physical force against others.
The full text of United States v. Reed can be found here: https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/25a0357p-06.pdf
The Fifth Circuit has determined that a federal conviction for influencing a federal official by threatening assault is a crime of violence because it involves threats of physical force.
The full text of McLean v. Bondi can be found here: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/20/20-61098-CV0.pdf
The Ninth Circuit has determined that an Oregon conviction for unlawful use of a weapon, even when coupled with an enhancement that specifies the weapon is a firearm, is not a crime of violence because it does not have as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another.
“ The firearm enhancement statute applies to ‘the use or threatened use of a firearm, whether operable or inoperable, by a defendant during the commission of a felony.’ Although this language requires the use or threatened use of a firearm, it does not, on its face, require the use or threatened use of a firearm ‘against the person of another.’”
The full text of United States v. Keast can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/09/10/24-1253.pdf
The Fifth Circuit has rejected an argument that a Louisiana conviction for aggravated battery is not a crime of violence, finding that the appellant had not demonstrated a realistic probability that Louisiana actually prosecutes reckless conduct under the statute.
The full text of US v. Sereal can be found here: https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/23/23-30198-CR0.pdf
The Second Circuit has determined that a Florida conviction for attempted second degree murder is a crime of violence. Because Florida attempted second-degree murder requires an intentionally committed act which would have resulted in death, the offense plainly satisfies the physical force requirement. The court also noted the mens rea for attempted second degree murder was simple higher than simple recklessness.
The full text of U.S. v. Delgado can be found here:
The Supreme Court has determined that a conviction that requires the infliction of bodily harm through an omission still requires the type of intentional violent force required by the definition of a crime of violence.
The full text of Delligatti v. United States can be found here:
The Second Circuit has determined that a New York conviction for second degree attempted assault under NYPL 120.05(7) is a crime of violence because it requires physical force causing injury to another person. Given the similarity between the definition of a crime of violence for immigration and criminal sentencing purposes, this case will likely be treated as precedential for immigration purposes as well.
The full text of U.S. v. Cooper can be found here:
The Ninth Circuit has determined that. Nevada conviction for felony battery resulting in substantial bodily harm is a crime of violence.
The full text of Villagomez v. McHenry can be found here:
https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2025/01/24/23-3558.pdf
