United States v. Seary-Colon, 997 F.3d 1

On April 3, 2012 two men robbed Piezas Importadas in Carolina, Puerto Rico; the gunman shot and killed store manager David Méndez-Calderón.
Two employees, José Méndez-del Valle and María Sanabria-Rivera, observed the shooter for ~2–3 seconds; they noted distinctive eyebrows and a tattoo on the shooter’s left leg.
Méndez identified Seary from a nine-photo array on April 4; Sanabria identified Seary from a six-photo array on April 17; Seary had been arrested April 6 on unrelated local charges and appeared on a newspaper cover April 9.
Investigators recovered a fired .40-caliber shell casing at the scene and later seized a matching .40-caliber bullet at the house where Seary was arrested.
Seary was indicted on Hobbs Act robbery (18 U.S.C. §1951), murder via firearms during a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. §924(j)), possession of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. §924(c)(1)(A)(iii)), and being a felon in possession (18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1)); a jury convicted him on all counts.
District court denied suppression of identifications and denied Rule 29 motions; on appeal Seary challenged suppression, sufficiency of evidence, and whether Hobbs Act robbery is a §924(c) 'crime of violence.'

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Suppression of photo-array identifications (due process)	IDs admissible; arrays not unduly suggestive	Arrays were suggestive (6 vs 9 photos, FBI procedures, newspaper exposure); in-court IDs tainted	Denied. No police-arranged undue suggestiveness; reliability for jury to weigh
Sufficiency of evidence linking Seary to robbery/murder	Eyewitness IDs, surveillance stills, matching .40 bullet, corroborating testimony	IDs unreliable (brief view, stress, inconsistencies), lack of forensic linkage or other physical evidence	Affirmed. Evidence viewed in govt's favor was sufficient for a rational jury
Whether Hobbs Act robbery is a 'crime of violence' under §924(c)	Hobbs Act robbery involves force/threat of force and qualifies under the force clause	Post-Davis, Hobbs Act robbery may only fit now-invalid residual clause	Affirmed. Court followed circuit precedent holding Hobbs Act robbery is categorically a §924(c) crime of violence

Neil v. Biggers, 409 U.S. 188 (factors for assessing eyewitness-identification reliability)
Simmons v. United States, 390 U.S. 377 (preclusion of unreliable identification evidence)
Manson v. Brathwaite, 432 U.S. 98 (balancing reliability against suggestiveness)
Perry v. New Hampshire, 565 U.S. 228 (due-process check requires police-arranged suggestiveness)
United States v. García-Ortiz, 904 F.3d 102 (1st Cir.) (Hobbs Act robbery is a §924(c) crime of violence)
United States v. Holliday, 457 F.3d 121 (1st Cir. 2006) (standard for suppression review)
United States v. Melvin, 730 F.3d 29 (1st Cir. 2013) (two-step analysis for suggestiveness then reliability)
United States v. Casey, 825 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2016) (defendant bears burden to show improper police conduct)
Moore v. Dickhaut, 842 F.3d 97 (1st Cir.) (reliability inquiry follows a finding of suggestiveness)
United States v. DeCologero, 530 F.3d 36 (1st Cir.) (application of Biggers factors)
United States v. Santos-Soto, 799 F.3d 49 (1st Cir.) (standard for sufficiency-of-the-evidence review)
United States v. Trinidad-Acosta, 773 F.3d 298 (1st Cir.) (preservation and review of sufficiency claims)
Foxworth v. St. Amand, 570 F.3d 414 (1st Cir.) (a single eyewitness can support a conviction)
Davis v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (Supreme Court) (invalidated §924(c) residual clause; discussed by parties)