United States v. Rex Hammond
996 F.3d 374
| 7th Cir. | 2021Background
- Over three weeks in October 2017 a masked man committed or attempted seven armed robberies in Indiana and Michigan; surveillance, weapon tracing, and DMV checks identified Rex Hammond as a suspect.
- ATF/locals recovered an abandoned Hi-Point traced to a seller who identified the buyer as "Rex" and provided a phone number; investigators linked that number to Hammond and his vehicle.
- Detective Ghiringhelli obtained historical and real-time cell-site location information (CSLI) from AT&T via an exigency request under 18 U.S.C. § 2702(c)(4) and the government later obtained a § 2703(d) order for historical CSLI.
- Real-time CSLI led officers to locate and stop Hammond on October 31; a search of his car (warrant obtained after the stop) produced a .22 revolver, ammunition, drugs, a phone, and GPS unit.
- A jury convicted Hammond of five Hobbs Act robberies (18 U.S.C. § 1951), two counts of brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)), and being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)); he was sentenced to 47 years.
- On appeal Hammond challenged (1) admission of CSLI and derivative evidence under Carpenter, (2) the § 922(g) jury instruction after Rehaif, (3) the § 924(c) predicate issue (whether Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence), and (4) the career-offender Guidelines classification under § 4B1.1.
Issues
| Issue | Hammond's Argument | Government's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression of CSLI and derivative evidence (Carpenter) | CSLI and all evidence derived from it should be suppressed because Carpenter requires a warrant for historical CSLI and compels exclusion | Historical CSLI obtained under §2703(d) admitted in good-faith reliance (pre-Carpenter); Ghiringhelli's historical CSLI wasn't used at trial; real-time CSLI was not a Fourth Amendment search on these facts (or was obtained in good faith under §2702) | Affirmed: §2703(d) CSLI admissible under good-faith exception; Ghiringhelli's historical CSLI not admitted/fruitless; real-time CSLI not a search given probable cause, short duration on public roads, and exigent-risk context (alternatively good-faith) |
| Rehaif jury instruction for §922(g) | Rehaif requires knowledge of felon status; absent that instruction, §922(g) conviction must be vacated or new trial ordered | Any omission was harmless—trial record and likely stipulation or proof of prior felonies make it certain a properly instructed jury would convict | Plain error found but harmless; conviction stands (no new trial) |
| Whether Hobbs Act robbery is a "crime of violence" under §924(c)(3)(A) | Hobbs Act can criminalize threats relating to property and thus (arguably) may not always require use/threat of physical force; conviction under §924(c) should be vacated | Hobbs Act robbery necessarily involves use or threat of physical force and falls within the elements clause; circuit precedent supports this | Court declines to revisit precedent (Anglin, Rivera); Hobbs Act robbery remains a crime of violence under §924(c)(3)(A); convictions affirmed |
| Career-offender enhancement under U.S.S.G. §4B1.1 | Hobbs Act robbery is not a qualifying "crime of violence" under the Guidelines' categorical/enumerated clause; enhancement invalid | Defendant forfeited the argument; even if error, district court made clear it would have imposed same sentence regardless of Guidelines range | Forfeiture (not waiver); plain-error review finds any Guidelines error did not affect sentence because judge said and explained he imposed sentence independent of Guidelines; enhancement did not require vacatur |
Key Cases Cited
- Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (2018) (historical CSLI generally requires a warrant; third-party doctrine limited)
- Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) (§922(g) requires proof defendant knew his prohibited status)
- Davis v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019) (invalidated residual clause of §924(c))
- United States v. Jones, 565 U.S. 400 (2012) (long-term GPS placement is a search)
- United States v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983) (beeper tracking of public movements not a search)
- United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984) (good-faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- Illinois v. Krull, 480 U.S. 340 (1987) (good-faith reliance on a statute)
- United States v. Patrick, 842 F.3d 540 (7th Cir. 2016) (cell-site simulator; fugitive cannot complain about how located)
- United States v. Curtis, 901 F.3d 846 (7th Cir. 2018) (pre-Carpenter §2703(d) CSLI admissible under good-faith exception)
- United States v. Maez, 960 F.3d 949 (7th Cir. 2020) (plain-error and remedy analysis post-Rehaif)
- United States v. Anglin, 846 F.3d 954 (7th Cir. 2017) (Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence under §924(c)'s elements clause)