974 F.3d 193
2d Cir.2020Background
- In June 2015 Walker robbed a Brooklyn convenience store, fired a gun that missed the clerk and struck a bystander, and was indicted on Hobbs Act robbery (Count One), violence-in-furtherance of a Hobbs Act robbery (Count Two), discharge/brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (Count Three), and being a felon in possession of ammunition under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) (Count Four).
- Trial was bifurcated: Counts One–Three tried first (convictions on One–Three), then Count Four tried after stipulations about prior felony and that a casing constituted ammunition (convicted on Four).
- Key evidence: surveillance video (with some footage missing), a late-disclosed fingerprint match on a cigarette carton, a photo-array identification by the victim, and an in-court identification by Walker’s probation officer (with profession concealed from jury).
- District Court denied motions to dismiss Count Three and to exclude the fingerprint; allowed cognitive-bias expert testimony and limited cross-examination of the victim (precluded questioning about the victim’s prior domestic-violence convictions); denied a Rule 33 new-trial motion alleging spoliation and juror impairment.
- At sentencing the court imposed the 10-year mandatory minimum on the § 924(c) count, denied ACCA enhancement because it concluded New York Robbery in the Second Degree was not an ACCA violent felony, and thus did not apply the 15-year ACCA minimum; both parties appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Hobbs Act robbery is a "crime of violence" for § 924(c) | Government/precedent: Hobbs Act robbery qualifies under the elements clause | Walker: Hobbs Act robbery does not categorically qualify as a crime of violence | Denied Walker’s challenge; Hill controls—Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence; conviction and jury instructions on Count Three affirmed |
| Effect of Rehaif on § 922(g)(1) conviction (Count Four) | Walker: indictment lacked allegation of knowledge of felon status; due process and jury-instruction errors require reversal | Government: Rehaif does not create jurisdictional defect; evidence shows Walker knew his status | Rejected Walker’s claims under plain-error review; Balde forecloses jurisdictional argument and Walker cannot show fourth-prong prejudice; conviction stands |
| Evidentiary rulings: late fingerprint disclosure, probation officer in-court ID, photo-array, exclusion of victim's domestic-violence convictions | Walker: district court abused discretion and prejudice requires new trial | Government: rulings within discretion; any errors harmless in light of other evidence | No abuse of discretion; fingerprint admission not substantially prejudicial; in-court ID and photo-array admissible with limits; exclusion of domestic-violence convictions proper under Rule 403 or harmless |
| Rule 33 motion: spoliation of surveillance video and juror impairment | Walker: missing footage and juror’s nightmare warrant new trial | Government: no evidence of bad faith or that missing footage was exculpatory; juror dismissal properly handled | Denied: Walker failed to show bad faith or that missing footage was exculpatory; court did not abuse discretion in handling juror |
| Government cross-appeal: ACCA predicate for New York Robbery in the Second Degree | Government: recent precedents treat NY robbery as ACCA violent felony requiring resentencing | Walker: (concedes in light of precedents) | Remand for resentencing because Second Circuit precedent treats NY Robbery as a violent felony under the ACCA |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Hill, 890 F.3d 51 (2d Cir.) (holds Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence for § 924(c))
- United States v. Balde, 943 F.3d 73 (2d Cir.) (indictment omission of Rehaif knowledge requirement is not jurisdictional)
- Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) (knowledge-of-status element applies to § 922(g) prosecutions)
- United States v. Thrower, 914 F.3d 770 (2d Cir.) (New York robbery treated as violent felony under ACCA)
- United States v. Pereira-Gomez, 903 F.3d 155 (2d Cir.) (guidance on treating NY robbery as a violent predicate)
- United States v. Miller, 954 F.3d 551 (2d Cir.) (plain-error framework and consideration of Rehaif effects on § 922(g) convictions)