Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Brown, 2:17-cr-00160-JAD-VCF. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180720b71 Visitors: 10
Filed: Jul. 19, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 19, 2018
Summary: Order Adopting Report and Recommendation and Denying Motion to Dismiss ECF Nos. 187, 204 JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . Deandre Brown has been charged with three crimes: (1) interference with commerce by robbery under 18 U.S.C. 1951; (2) use of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1)(A)(ii); and (3) conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1951. 1 A crime of violence is a felony that "(A) has as an el
More

Order Adopting Report and Recommendation and Denying Motion to Dismiss

ECF Nos. 187, 204

Deandre Brown has been charged with three crimes: (1) interference with commerce by robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 1951; (2) use of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii); and (3) conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951.1 A crime of violence is a felony that "(A) has as an element the use, attempted use, or threated use of physical force against the person or property of another, or (B) that by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense."2 Brown moves to dismiss his indictment, arguing that clause B in the crime-of-violence definition is unconstitutionally vague and that Hobbs Act robbery does not qualify under the force clause either.3

Magistrate Judge Ferenbach reviewed Brown's dismissal motion, and he recommends that I deny it because the Hobbs Act robbery that Brown is charged with qualifies as a crime of violence under the force clause, and the Ninth Circuit has expressly rejected the arguments that Brown offers to challenge that clause.4 Judge Ferenbach issued his recommendation on July 3, 2018, making July 17, 2018, the deadline to file objections. That deadline has now expired, and Brown has not objected. "[N]o review is required of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation unless objections are filed."5

Accordingly, with good cause appearing and no reason to delay, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Ferenbach's report and recommendation [ECF No. 204] is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED, and Brown's motion to dismiss his indictment [ECF No. 187] is DENIED.

FootNotes


1. ECF No. 109.
2. 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3).
3. ECF No. 187 at 3-4.
4. ECF No. 204 at 3.
5. Schmidt v. Johnstone, 263 F.Supp.2d 1219, 1226 (D. Ariz. 2003); see also United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003).
Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer