US v. Raquan Scott
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Vacated
The Fourth Circuit vacated Raquan Unique Scott’s sentence and remanded for resentencing, holding that his prior Virginia conviction for using a firearm during a robbery (Va. Code § 18.2-53.1) is not a “crime of violence” under the Sentencing Guidelines § 4B1.2(a)(1) elements clause. The court rejected the government’s alternative arguments and expressly disagreed with a recent First Circuit decision that reached the opposite conclusion, thereby creating an inter-circuit split.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether a conviction under Virginia Code § 18.2-53.1 (use or display of a firearm during the commission of robbery) categorically qualifies as a "crime of violence" under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a), either through the elements clause or the enumerated-offense clause.
Circuit Positions
Va. Code § 18.2-53.1 predicated on robbery is NOT a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)
Va. Code § 18.2-53.1 predicated on robbery IS a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a) (elements and enumerated-offense clauses)
Conflict Summary
The Fourth Circuit holds that § 18.2-53.1 (with robbery as the predicate offense) does not require, as an element, the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against another person and therefore is not a crime of violence under the Guidelines; it also cast doubt on applying the enumerated-offense clause. The First Circuit, in United States v. Mao, concluded that the same Virginia statute categorically matches both the elements clause and the enumerated-offense clause, treating it as a crime of violence/robbery.