U.S. v. Worthen

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss charge of aiding and abetting discharge of firearm resulting in death under 18 USC section 924(j), where: (1) government was required to show that discharge of firearm was in course of “crime of violence;” and (2) relevant “crime of violence” was Hobbs Act robbery, where defendant and two others robbed gun store, and where one of said accomplices shot and killed store owner. Basis of defendant’s motion to dismiss was contention that Hobbs Act robbery did not qualify as crime of violence for purposes of section 924(j), and Dist. Ct. could properly base denial of motion to dismiss on Fox, 878 F.3d 574, where court found that Hobbs Act robbery qualified as crime of violence. On appeal, defendant argued for first time that his charged offense of aiding and abetting Hobbs Act robbery did not qualify as crime of violence. Ct. of Appeals, though, held that: (1) Hobbs Act robbery qualified as crime of violence for purposes of section 924(j); and (2) charge of aiding and abetting Hobbs Act robbery also qualified as crime of violence for purposes of section 924(j), since aider and abettor of Hobbs Act robbery necessarily commits all elements of principle Hobbs Act robbery offense.