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.”
