United States v. Stacy Haynes
936 F.3d 683
7th Cir.2019Background
- In 1996 Stacy Haynes robbed six stores at gunpoint (three in Illinois, three in Iowa); he was indicted on Hobbs Act (18 U.S.C. § 1951) robberies for the Illinois incidents and on interstate-travel-for-crime (18 U.S.C. § 1952(a)(2)(B)) counts for the Iowa incidents, each §1952 count accompanied by a §924(c) firearms count.
- A jury convicted Haynes on all counts; later sentencing and collateral litigation (post-Johnson) vacated mandatory life terms tied to prior Illinois burglaries, but Haynes remains sentenced to lengthy terms driven largely by six §924(c) convictions.
- The appeal challenges three §924(c) convictions that are predicated on §1952(a)(2)(B) convictions, arguing §1952 is not divisible such that the court may look through to the specific underlying Hobbs Act robberies (crimes of violence).
- Controlling legal context: after Johnson, the Court’s categorical approach and the invalidation of residual clauses (Dimaya, Davis) mean a §924(c) predicate must satisfy the elements clause (use/threatened/attempted use of force).
- The Seventh Circuit held §1952(a)(2)(B) incorporates the elements of the underlying “crime of violence” (here, Hobbs Act robbery), so it is divisible and amenable to the modified categorical approach; the specific record (indictment and verdict forms) show the jury found the Hobbs Act robberies, so the §924(c) convictions stand.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether §1952(a)(2)(B) is divisible so courts can use the modified categorical approach | Haynes: the underlying crime-of-violence is a mere means to satisfy §1952’s element, not a distinct element — so §1952 is indivisible | Gov't: §1952 incorporates the elements of the specified underlying unlawful activity/crime of violence, creating alternative elements and making the statute divisible | Held: §1952(a)(2)(B) is divisible; the elements of the underlying crime of violence are incorporated and may be examined via the modified categorical approach |
| Whether Haynes’ §1952 convictions qualify as crimes of violence for §924(c) purposes | Haynes: because §16(b) (residual clause) formerly expanded §1952, current law invalidates those predicates; thus §924(c) convictions cannot rest on §1952 convictions that weren’t elementally tied to force | Gov't: the §1952 counts here alleged and the record show Hobbs Act robbery as the underlying crime — Hobbs Act robbery satisfies the elements clause | Held: Because the §1952 counts were tied to Hobbs Act robberies (which are crimes of violence under the elements clause), the §924(c) convictions are supported |
| Jury unanimity / sufficiency of jury instructions on the underlying Hobbs Act elements | Haynes: jury instructions for §1952 did not recite Hobbs Act elements; lack of explicit unanimity on the specific underlying crime or force element undermines §924(c) predicates | Gov't: indictment and verdict forms, plus trial context, show jury convicted “as alleged” for §1952 counts tied to specific Hobbs Act robberies | Held: Although better instructions would be preferable, the record (indictments, verdicts, prior Hobbs Act instructions given elsewhere at trial) shows the jury necessarily found the Hobbs Act robberies; any instructional omission was harmless |
| Remedy / broader rule for future prosecutions | Haynes: seeks reversal of the three §924(c) convictions premised on §1952 | Gov't: convictions should be affirmed and the court should clarify divisibility and unanimity requirements | Held: Affirmed; court clarifies that future §1952(a)(2)(B) prosecutions must prove (and juries must unanimously find) the specific underlying crime of violence supporting the §1952 conviction |
Key Cases Cited
- Samuel Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (invalidating ACCA residual clause and prompting categorical-method scrutiny)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (adopting the categorical approach for predicate offenses)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (distinguishing elements from means; divisibility and use of the modified categorical approach)
- Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018) (holding residual clause in §16(b) unconstitutionally vague)
- United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019) (invalidating residual clause of §924(c) and emphasizing elements-clause requirement)
- Rodriguez-Moreno v. United States, 526 U.S. 275 (1999) (holding elements of the underlying crime are essential conduct elements for §924(c) prosecutions)
- United States v. Fox, 878 F.3d 574 (7th Cir. 2017) (holding Hobbs Act robbery is a categorical crime of violence under the elements clause)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005) (limiting documents courts may consult under the modified categorical approach)