Assessing Divisibility in the Armed Career Criminal Act

When courts analyze whether a defendant's prior conviction qualifies as a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act's residual clause, they use a categorical approach, looking only to the statutory language of the prior offense, rather than the facts disclosed by the record of con...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Koehler, Ted (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Libro
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2012
En:Año: 2012
Acceso en línea: Volltext (kostenfrei)
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002c 4500
001 1866326406
003 DE-627
005 20250122054902.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231019s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1866326406 
035 |a (DE-599)KXP1866326406 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rda 
041 |a eng 
084 |a 2,1  |2 ssgn 
100 1 |a Koehler, Ted  |e VerfasserIn  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Assessing Divisibility in the Armed Career Criminal Act 
264 1 |c 2012 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a When courts analyze whether a defendant's prior conviction qualifies as a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act's residual clause, they use a categorical approach, looking only to the statutory language of the prior offense, rather than the facts disclosed by the record of conviction. But when a defendant is convicted under a divisible statute, which encompasses a broader range of conduct, only some of which would qualify as a predicate offense, courts may employ the modified categorical approach. This approach allows courts to view additional documents to determine whether the jury convicted the defendant of the Armed Career Criminal Act-qualifying part of the statute. This Note identifies a split among the circuit courts regarding when a statute is divisible. Under the formal method, a statute is divisible only when its text specifies qualifying and nonqualifying categories of conduct. By contrast, courts that employ the functional method divide a statute if regardless of the statute's text, it is possible to violate the statute in a way that amounts to a violent felony and in a way that does not amount to a violent felony. This Note contends that the text-based formal method is more consistent with the Supreme Court's Armed Career Criminal Act jurisprudence, the Sixth Amendment, and the rule of lenity. Finally, it argues that the formal method gives Congress the strongest incentive to revise the vague and confusing Armed Career Criminal Act 
856 4 0 |u https://core.ac.uk/download/232689379.pdf  |x Verlag  |z kostenfrei  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
951 |a BO 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 4392972135 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1866326406 
LOK |0 005 20231019043659 
LOK |0 008 231019||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 035   |a (DE-2619)CORE69322531 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-2619  |c DE-627  |d DE-2619 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-2619 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a core 
OAS |a 1 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw