Statutory Interpretation

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. D.D.B.

Case No.: 17-2563

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and KANNE and ROVNER, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Statutory Interpretation

The government wishes to try D.D.B. as an adult for robbing a pharmacy. In order to do so, however, it must prove that he had a prior conviction for a violent offense. We must decide, therefore, whether attempted robbery under Indiana law is such an offense—a question that appears cut and dried on its face, but actually poses some challenges.

The district court erred by simply applying the rationale of Duncan and Hill—that any attempted violent felony is itself a violent felony—to the crime of attempted robbery in Indiana. The district court failed to consider the import of intent to this analysis and the lack of an intent requirement in Indiana’s crime of attempted robbery.

In sum, because the crime of attempted robbery in Indiana does not require a finding of intent, the reasoning of Hill does not apply. No finder-of-fact has found that D.D.B. had an intent to use, attempt to use, or threatened the use of physical force against the person of another. 18 U.S.C. § 5032. D.D.B. filed his appeal in a timely manner. Of course, on remand, the government is free to raise the other two predicate crimes of burglary and conspiracy to commit robbery again as it has preserved those issues by raising them with the district court. The judgment of the district court is VACATED and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this decision.

Vacated and Remanded.

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.