In United States v. Eason et al., 16-15413 (Mar. 24, 2020) (Jill Pryor, Jordan, Walker), the Court held that Hobbs Act robbery is not a “crime of violence” under the career offender guideline in USSG 4B1.2.
The Court joined four other circuits that had concluded that Hobbs Act robbery did not satisfy any of the three possible definitions. As for the elements clause, which (unlike the elements clause in 924(c)) is limited to force against another person, the Court concluded that Hobbs Act robbery was overbroad because, by its plain statutory language, it could be committed by threats of force against property, not people. For that same reason, the Court concluded that it did not satisfy the generic definition of “robbery.” And, finally, the Court concluded that it did not satisfy the Guidelines’ narrow definition of “extortion,” which requires a threat or fear of “physical injury.”