United States v. Thomas Royal

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Maryland’s second-degree assault statute was not divisible for purposes of determining whether prior conviction qualified as a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act
• holding that Maryland’s second-degree assault statute was not divisible for purposes of determining whether prior conviction qualified as a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act
• reasoning that, because the Maryland offense of second-degree assault has an indivisible set of elements that may be committed by either violent or nonviolent means, it does not qualify categorically as an ACCA “violent felony”
• referring to court- approved instructions to determine whether “‘offensive physical contact’ and ‘physical harm’ are alternative elements of the completed battery form of second-degree assault”
• turning to state law to determine whether the Maryland offense of assault was divisible and concluding that it was not
• turning to state law to determine whether the Maryland offense of assault was divisible and concluding that it was not

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).