UNITED STATES v. JONES (2020)

SUMMARY ORDER

Appellant Brian Jones appeals from the March 23, 2016 judgment of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Bianco, J.), convicting him, after a jury trial, of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) and brandishing a firearm during a crime of violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii). The district court sentenced Jones principally to 132 months of imprisonment. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, procedural history, and issues on appeal.

On appeal, Jones argues that his conviction of Hobbs Act robbery conspiracy is not a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Jones claims that Hobbs Act robbery conspiracy does not require the use of force such that it meets the definition of “crime of violence” under the elements clause of Section 924(c)(3)(A). He further argues that Section 924(c)(3)(B), the definition’s residual clause, is unconstitutional.

Based on recent precedent from our Court and the Supreme Court, we agree. The Supreme Court in United States v. Davis, ––– U.S. ––––, 139 S. Ct. 2319, 204 L.Ed.2d 757 (2019), held that Section 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague. And following the Supreme Court’s decision in Davis, this Circuit concluded that Hobbs Act robbery conspiracy does not qualify as a Section 924(c) crime of violence. United States v. Barrett, 937 F.3d 126, 127 (2d Cir. 2019). In light of these decisions, Jones’s conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii) must be vacated.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court hereby is VACATED and this matter is REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this order.