New Jersey & New York Legal Defense
Third Circuit Opinion: United States v. Chapman Providing Innovative Solutions & Obtaining Optimal Results
Legal

Third Circuit Opinion: United States v. Chapman

In United States v. Chapman, No. 16-1810 (3d Cir. Aug. 4, 2017), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that mailing threatening communications, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §876(c), qualifies as a “crime of violence” for purposes of determining career offender status under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. Violations of §876(c) are punishable by up to five years imprisonment generally, or up to ten years if directed against a federal judge or federal law enforcement official. Chapman had been convicted of two prior violations of §876(c), first after he mailed a letter threatening to kill President George W. Bush, and then after mailing a letter which threatened a federal judge and court staff. After violating the terms of his supervised release following his second conviction, Chapman sent another threatening letter to the federal prosecutor who was handling Chapman’s revocation. After pleading guilty, Chapman was deemed a career offender based on his three convictions under §876(c).

Chapman argued that mailing threatening communications was not a crime of violence because it did not require “violent physical force.” The Court applied a categorical approach to the question, comparing only the elements of the statute against the guideline and disregarding the particular facts of Chapman’s offenses. By this method, if the statute has the same element as the guideline, or defines the offense more narrowly, then a violation counts toward career offender status. If the statute defines offense conduct more broadly, then career status is not implicated. The Sentencing Guidelines define the predicate “crime of violence” as including any offense punishable by more than one year imprisonment that has as an element the “threatened use of physical force against another.” The statute prohibits communications “containing [] any threat to injure the person of the addresses or of another.” The Court noted the Supreme Court’s interpretation of “physical force” as “violent force” and reasoned that the common definition of “injure” implicates “physical force.” Therefore, the violations of §876(c) qualify toward career offender status. By its holding, the Court brought the Third Circuit into alignment with the First, Second, Eighth, and D.C. Circuits.

Categories

What Makes Us Different?

  • Proactive Representation

    We are dedicated to protecting your rights and fighting for your freedom.

  • Innovative Approach

    We provide innovative, personalized solutions to best fit your needs.

  • Free Consultation

    We believe nobody should have to pay when looking to hire an attorney.

  • Premier Boutique Law Firm

    We handle the most serious and complex white-collar, state and federal crimes.

Practicing in New Jersey & New York for Over 35 Years

Real People, Real Stories

  • “Jack represented me in a criminal case brought by the State of New Jersey, Division of Justice, Corruption bureau. The OAG spent five years preparing their case, so when they declared my employer and ...”

    - Paul
  • “Jack Arseneault was a beacon of hope to my family and I at a time when my options appeared limited back in 2011. I pretty much would of been behind bars without a doubt if it wasn’t for him. Not only ...”

    - Dominique
  • “My brother was facing criminal charges which were a result of identity theft. My friend suggests me to contact Arseneault & Fassett, LLP. I had discussed my brother cases with their professional team ...”

    - Mark J.
  • “My experience with Arseneault & Fassett, LLP was exceptional: they were knowledgeable and professional. Their staff is experienced and give you the best solution for your problem. We were very ...”

    - Charlize J.
  • “I hired Jack to defend me in a criminal case brought against me by the Federal Government. Jack worked tirelessly for me for over four years which resulted in a positive outcome that I believe would ...”

    - Frank
/

Results That Matter

  • 17-Count State Criminal Indictment Outright Dismissal
  • Billing Fraud Acquittal Of All Charges
  • Federal Anti-Trust Civil Complaint Settled
  • Federal Criminal Charges Immunity
  • Federal Criminal Indictment Dismissed
  • Federal Structuring Charges One-Year License Suspension
  • Fraud Dismissed
  • Fraud Offenses Six-Month Halfway House
  • Fraud Offenses Noncustodial Probationary Sentence and $90,000
  • Fraudulent Bill Submittal Three-Month License Suspension
/

Build A Strong Defense Today

Request a Free Evaluation with Our Powerhouse Team
  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • Please enter your phone number.
    This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.