Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

United States v. Marcus Watson

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided February 1, 2018No. 16-15357PublishedCited by 88 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

2Per curiam

We must decide whether armed bank robbery under federal law is a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). We hold that it is.

The government charged Marcus Watson and Rogussia Danielson with armed-bank robbery committed “by force, violence, and by intimidation,” in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d), after they robbed an American Savings Bank while armed with handguns. The government also charged them with using or carrying a firearm during a crime of violence (namely, the armed bank robbery), in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). Watson and Daniel-son pleaded guilty to…

3Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Mathis v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2016
  2. Johnson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  3. Leocal v. AshcroftSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  4. Moncrieffe v. HolderSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
  5. Carter v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2000

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

4Cited by88 opinions

  1. United States v. Monico DominguezCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2020
  2. United States v. Antonio BlackstoneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2018
  3. United States v. DeiterCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2018
  4. King v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2020
  5. United States v. EvansCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2019

83 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API