Summary
vacating the defendant's § 924(c) conviction "based on attempted Hobbs Act robbery" since "Taylor governs"
Summary of this case from Hartsfield v. United StatesOpinion
19-14132
08-02-2022
BOBBY RICKY MADISON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent- Appellee.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 0:16-cv-62993-DMM
Before JORDAN, JILL PRYOR, and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM
In this appeal, Bobby Madison challenges his conviction (and resulting 60-month consecutive sentence) on Count 3 under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A) based on attempted Hobbs Act robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a). We held the case pending the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Taylor, 142 S.Ct. 2015, 2020-22 (2022) (holding that attempted Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A)'s force clause), and then asked the parties to brief the impact of that decision on this appeal.
In response, the parties have submitted a joint letter brief in which they state (and agree on) the following. First, Taylor resolves this appeal in Mr. Madison's favor. Second, the government is expressly waiving procedural default as a defense to Mr. Madison's challenge to his § 924(c)(3)(A) conviction and sentence. Third, in light of Taylor, this court should vacate Mr. Madison's conviction and 60-month consecutive sentence.
Given the government's waiver of procedural default, we agree with the parties that Taylor governs. We therefore vacate Mr. Madison's Count 3 conviction and consecutive 60-month sentence, and remand to the district court for entry of a new judgment.
VACATED and REMANDED.