United States v. Darrel Duane Grisel
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by Judge GRABER; Dissent by Judge BEA.
GRABER, Circuit Judge.
We took this case en banc primarily to reexamine the validity of United States v. Cunningham, 911 F.2d 361 (9th Cir.1990) (per curiam). In Cunningham, we held that second-degree burglary under Oregon law is a categorical burglary offense under the analysis required by Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575, 110 S.Ct. 2143, 109 L.Ed.2d 607 (1990), for purposes of applying the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984 (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). Cunningham, 911 F.2d at 363. We now hold that Cunningham was wrongly decided and expressly…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Almendarez-Torres v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Taylor v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by219 opinions
- United States v. Pineda-ArrellanoCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2007
- United States v. StittSupreme Court of the United States · 2018
- United States v. Aguila-Montes De OcaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- United States v. VidalCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2007
- United States v. Victor StittCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
214 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.