Anthony Christopher Diggs, Jr. v. United States

The Hobbs Act robbery statute makes it illegal to interfere with interstate commerce by threats or violence. 18 U.S.C. § 1951. In United States v. Taylor, 596 U.S. 845 (2022), this Court held that, under the categorical approach, a conviction for attempted Hobbs Act robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) did not qualify as a crime of violence for purposes of a mandatory sentencing enhancement under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). However, the Court left for another day the question of whether completed Hobbs Act robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) qualified as a crime of violence for purposes of a mandatory sentencing enhancement under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Under the categorical approach, this Court looks to the least culpable conduct under a given statute to determine whether the offense qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The Question Presented here is: Given that a violation of the Hobbs Act robbery statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a), can be committed merely by threatening to take intangible rights such as a stock option, or the right to conduct business, by causing a victim to simply “fear” a financial loss—but not “physical violence”— and such an offense does not have as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another, is completed Hobbs Act robbery a crime of violence, under the categorical approach, for purposes of a mandatory sentencing enhancement under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)?