United States v. Bell

Good Law
158 F. Supp. 3d 906·2016 WL 344749·2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11035
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 2016Case No. 15-cr-00258-WHOCalifornia8,279 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Orrick, J.

ORDER ON DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS TO DISMISS

Re: Dkt. Nos. 37, 38,

INTRODUCTION

Count Four of the indictment in this case charges defendants Donnie Bell, Dwight Hart, and Antonio Johnson with using a firearm during a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c). The indictment alleges two crime of violence predicates for the section 924(c) charge: assault on a person assisting a federal officer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 111 (Count Two), and robbery of government property in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2112 (Count Three).

Defendants’ motions to dismiss under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 12(b)(3)(B)(v), arguing that the section 924(c) charge fails to state an offense because neither of the alleged crime of violence predicates qualifies as a crime of *910 violence under the definition set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c)(3), are DENIED. For the reasons discussed below, I find that section 2112 is not a crime of violence under section 924(c)(3), but that section 111 is.

BACKGROUND

On May 7, 2015, Bell, Hart, and Johnson were charged in a common indictment with (1) one count of conspiracy, 18 U.S.C. § 371 ; (2) one count of assault on a person assisting a federal officer,…

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.