Opinion
Case No.: 2:13-cr-00221-APG-CWH
08-11-2020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff v. ANTHONY JORDAN, Defendant
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO AMEND
[ECF No. 280]
Defendant Anthony Jordan moves to amend his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petition to add a ground for relief arguing that his conviction for aiding and abetting bank robbery cannot serve as a predicate crime of violence for his 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) conviction. ECF No. 280. The government opposes the motion, arguing the proposed amendment is futile. I agree that amendment would be futile because the proposed additional ground is foreclosed by United States v. Watson, 881 F.3d 782 (9th Cir. 2018). I thus deny the motion to amend.
Section 924(c) imposes a mandatory consecutive term of imprisonment for using or carrying a firearm "during and in relation to any crime of violence." 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). The term "crime of violence" is defined as an offense that is a felony and "(A) has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another, or (B) that by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense." 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3). In Watson, the Ninth Circuit held that bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) categorically qualifies as a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A). 881 F.3d at 786. Jordan concedes this and argues that the Ninth Circuit's decision was incorrect. But I am bound to follow the decisions of the Ninth Circuit. Yong v. I.N.S., 208 F.3d 1116, 1119 n.2 (9th Cir. 2000). If I were to grant Jordan leave to amend his petition to add this claim, I would be bound to immediately deny the claim on its merits as foreclosed by Watson. As such, the proposed amendment is futile.
I THEREFORE ORDER that defendant Anthony Jordan's Motion to Amend (ECF No. 280) is DENIED.
DATED this 11th day of August, 2020.
/s/_________
ANDREW P. GORDON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE