United States v. Richard Mathews, 37 F.4th 622

In 1990 Mathews placed an explosive device in an alley that detonated and seriously injured an innocent bystander; he was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 844(i) (explosive property damage) and 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) (using/carrying a firearm/explosive during a crime of violence).
An explosive counts as a “firearm” under § 924(c), and using an explosive under § 924(c)(1)(B)(ii) carried a mandatory consecutive 30-year term; Mathews’s total sentence was 495 months, 360 months attributable to the § 924(c) count.
After Johnson and then Davis invalidated similar residual clauses as unconstitutionally vague, Mathews filed a § 2255 motion arguing his § 924(c) conviction relied on § 924(c)(3)(B)’s now-void residual clause.
The Government conceded that, under the categorical approach, Mathews’s § 844(i) conviction does not qualify as a § 924(c)(3)(A) crime of violence; the district court nonetheless denied relief, relying on a prior Ninth Circuit panel decision about congressional intent and declining to apply the categorical approach.
The Ninth Circuit reviewed de novo, applied the categorical approach, concluded § 844(i) is not categorically a crime of violence because it can cover destruction of one’s own property, reversed the district court’s denial of § 2255 relief, and remanded to vacate the § 924(c) conviction and resentence.

Issue	Mathews' Argument	Government/District Court Argument	Held
Whether a § 844(i) conviction qualifies as a "crime of violence" under § 924(c)(3) after Davis	§ 924(c) conviction rests on the residual clause; Davis voids that clause so § 924(c) conviction must be vacated	Argues § 844(i) is a crime of violence (district court relied on prior panel finding of Congressional intent)	§ 844(i) is not categorically a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A); § 924(c) conviction vacated
Whether the district court could rely on the earlier Ninth Circuit decision instead of applying the categorical approach	Categorical approach should be applied; prior panel intent findings do not negate categorical test	District court claimed it was bound by past panel’s view of congressional intent and therefore need not apply the categorical approach	Courts must apply the categorical approach; district court erred in refusing to apply it

United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019) (Struck down § 924(c)(3)(B) residual clause as unconstitutionally vague)
Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (2015) (Held similar residual clause in ACCA void for vagueness)
Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) (Explains and requires the categorical approach for comparing statutory elements)
United States v. Mathews, 36 F.3d 821 (9th Cir. 1994) (Prior Ninth Circuit decision on double jeopardy and congressional intent relied on by district court)