In In re Navarro, No. 19-12612 (July 30, 2019) (Ed Carnes, Rosenbaum, Black) (per curiam), the Court denied a successive application based on Davis.
Although the applicant ultimately pled guilty only to Hobbs Act conspiracy and 924(c), the plea agreement and factual proffer established that his 924(c) offense was predicated on both Hobbs Act conspiracy and two charged drug trafficking offenses in connection with a stash house robbery. And the facts for all three predicate offenses were inextricaly intertwined. Therefore, the Court reasoned, even ifthe Hobbs Act conspiracy no longer qualified as a crime of violence, his drug offenses fully supported the 924(c) conviction. The Court noted that this case was distinguishable from In re Gomez because that case involved a jury trial, which returned a general verdict; here, however, there was no uncertainty as to which of the predicate offenses identified in the indictment underlied the 924(c) conviction.
The Court also denied authorization as to a claim about the Sentencing Guidelines.
Judge Rosenbaum concurred because, on this record, it was clear that the 924(c) offense was based in part on drug offenses. However, she would have ended the analysis there.