891 F.3d 1190
9th Cir.2018Background
- Hans Edling pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- District court treated three prior Nevada convictions as "crimes of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a): assault with a deadly weapon, robbery, and coercion.
- Sentencing Guidelines base offense level depends on number of prior "crimes of violence;" district court applied the higher base by counting all three convictions.
- Edling challenged whether each Nevada offense satisfies the Guidelines’ definition of "crime of violence" using the categorical approach.
- Ninth Circuit affirmed that assault with a deadly weapon is a crime of violence, but held Nevada robbery and felony coercion are not categorical matches.
Issues
| Issue | Edling's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Nevada assault with a deadly weapon is a "crime of violence" under § 4B1.2(a) | Not a crime of violence | It involves threatened use of force via a deadly weapon and thus qualifies | Assault-with-deadly-weapon is a crime of violence under the elements clause |
| Whether Nevada robbery is a "crime of violence" under § 4B1.2(a) | Nevada robbery can be satisfied by threats to property only, so not a match | Listed "robbery" (and previously "extortion") in the enumerated clause makes it a crime of violence | Nevada robbery is not a categorical match (sweeps to threats to property); not a crime of violence |
| Whether the 2016 definition of "extortion" in the Guidelines covers threats to property | N/A (Edling relied on amendment to argue robbery no longer covered via extortion) | The amended extortion definition still covers extortion sufficient to catch Nevada robbery | Amendment narrows extortion to threats of physical injury to persons; does not encompass threats to property; rule of lenity resolves any ambiguity in defendant's favor |
| Whether Nevada felony coercion is a "crime of violence" under § 4B1.2(a) | Felony coercion involves "physical force or immediate threat" and thus qualifies | It qualifies under the elements clause as use/threat of violent force | Felony coercion is not a categorical match: Nevada law permits non-violent or property-directed force; does not require Johnson-level violent physical force |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (defines "physical force" for crime-of-violence purposes as violent force capable of causing pain or injury)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (modified categorical approach for divisible statutes)
- United States v. Simmons, 782 F.3d 510 (9th Cir. standard for categorical approach)
- United States v. Molinar, 881 F.3d 1064 (compare least-acts criminalized under categorical approach)
- United States v. Harris, 572 F.3d 1065 (prior Ninth Circuit decision addressing Nevada robbery and extortion pre-amendment)
- United States v. O’Connor, 874 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. interpreting amended extortion definition as excluding property threats)
- Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (Guidelines and vagueness; discussed re: rule of lenity applicability)
- United States v. Leal-Felix, 665 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. en banc: rule of lenity applies to Guidelines)