UNITED STATES v. NELSON (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lamont Benedict NELSON, aka Lamont Lee, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 17-55246

Decided: January 26, 2021

Before: McKEOWN, CALLAHAN, and BRESS, Circuit Judges. Sherri Walker Hobson, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Daniel Earl Zipp, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Office of the US Attorney, San Diego, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee Kara Hartzler, Federal Defenders of San Diego, Inc., San Diego, CA, for Defendant-Appellant

MEMORANDUM **

Federal prisoner Lamont Benedict Nelson appeals from the district court's judgment denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his conviction and sentence. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. Reviewing de novo, see United States v. Reves, 774 F.3d 562, 564 (9th Cir. 2014), we affirm.

Nelson challenges his conviction and sentence under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2 and 924(c) for aiding and abetting the use and carry of a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence. Nelson's contention that Hobbs Act robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, is not a crime of violence for purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) is foreclosed. See United States v. Dominguez, 954 F.3d 1251, 1260-61 (9th Cir. 2020) (reaffirming that Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence under the elements clause of § 924(c)(3)). Nelson asserts that Dominguez was wrongly decided, but as a three-judge panel, we are bound by the decision. See Miller v. Gammie, 335 F.3d 889, 900 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (three-judge panel is bound by circuit precedent unless that precedent is “clearly irreconcilable” with intervening higher authority).

AFFIRMED.