United States v. Drummond, 925 F.3d 681 (4th Cir. 2019). South Carolina criminal domestic violence is a violent felony under the force clause of the ACCA.
United States v. Battle, 927 F.3d 160 (4th Cir. 2019). Maryland assault with intent to murder is a violent felony under the force clause of the ACCA.
United States v. Dinkins, 928 F.3d 349 (4th Cir. 2019). North Carolina common law robbery is a violent felony under ACCA because it requires the use of force sufficient to overcome the victim’s resistance. North Carolina accessory before the fact of armed robbery is also a violent felony because that offense incorporates the elements of armed robbery, which is itself a violent felony.
United States v. Walker, 934 F.3d 375 (4th Cir. 2019). Kidnapping in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a) is not a crime of violence under the force of clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) because the offense can be committed in non-forcible ways such as luring the victim away through deceit.
United States v. Norman, 935 F.3d 232 (4th Cir, 2019). Conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 is not a controlled substance offense under §4B1.2. The statute does not require an overt act, therefore it covers a broader range of conduct than generic conspiracy. In the instant case, the error was not “plain” because prior case law “sufficiently muddied the water.”
United States v. Allred, 942 F.3d 641 (4th Cir. 2019). Witness retaliation in which the defendant was charged with knowingly engaging in conduct that caused bodily injury under 18 U.S.C. § 1513(b) is a violent felony under the ACCA. The statute is divisible and the modified categorical approach can be applied to determine which of the alternative crimes in the statute formed the basis of the conviction.
United States v. Johnson, 945 F.3d 174 (4th Cir 2019). Maryland robbery is a “violent felony” under the force clause of the ACCA because it requires either force sufficient to overcome the victim’s resistance or force capable of causing personal injury. Maryland possession with intent to distribute is a “controlled substance offense” under §4B1.2(b) because the statute requires proof of possession and intent to sell drugs.
United States v. Bryant, 949 F.3d 168 (4th Cir. 2020). Assault with intent to rob a postal employee in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2114(a) is a crime of violence under the force clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A).
United States v. Ward, 972 F.3d 364 (4th Cir. A2020). Virginia manufacturing, selling, giving, distributing, or possessing with intent to manufacture, sell, give or distribute a controlled substance or an imitation controlled substance is a controlled substance offense under §4B1.2. A “controlled substance” means any substance controlled by the jurisdiction of conviction, not substances controlled by federal law.