United States v. Joe Benally

Good Law
843 F.3d 350·2016 WL 6574490·2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 20048
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 7, 201614-10452California2,013 words

Opinion

Opinion

Noonan, J.

ORDER

The opinion filed on August 1, 2016 is amended as follows:

Replace the portion of the opinion that runs from the second paragraph of page 9 of the slip opinion (beginning ) through the end of the penultimate paragraph on page 10 (which ends < ... and is no longer good law.>) with:

§ 16.” Femandez-Ruiz, 466 F.3d at 1130. This June, the Supreme Court suggested the opposite, and held that for purposes of a similar statute — 18 U.S.C. § 921 (a)(33)(A) — reckless conduct indeed can constitute a crime of violence. See Voisine v. United States, 136 S.Ct. 2272, 2279-80, 2282 (2016). But we need not resolve any tension regarding the inclusion of reckless conduct in this case. The government concedes that § 1112, which 'requires a mental state of only gross negligence, prohibits conduct that cannot be a “crime of violence,” even after Voisine. Springfield’s opposing rule is clearly irreconcilable with the reasoning and the results of Leocal and Femandez-Ruiz and is no…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.