Michael Mao v. United States

At issue is whether Petitioner is a career offender per U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. Two distinct questions for this Court, both of which implicate circuit-splits, should be resolved in Petitioner’s favor:

1. Should this case be held, and eventually remanded, pending this Court’s anticipated disposition of Beaird v. United States, 25-5343 (April 20, 2026) (order granting petition for certiorari), because the question presented in Beaird – “Whether Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36 (1993), still correctly states the rule for the deference that courts must give to the commentary to the Sentencing Guidelines?” – controls one of the issues Petitioner presented to the court below?

2. In reaching a decision contrary to the Fourth Circuit regarding whether Petitioner’s Virginia-state conviction for using or displaying a firearm while committing a robbery, Va. Code Ann. § 18.2.-53.1, is a crime of violence per U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a) (2021), did the lower court misstate state law in a manner that raises federalism concerns and violates this Court’s admonition to “defer considerably,” McMillan v. Monroe County, 520 U.S. 781, 786 (1997), to the court of appeals with most experience interpreting the laws of the state in which it sits?