Pereda v. United States
In brief
The Supreme Court refused to hear Pereda's case and did not decide whether reckless conduct satisfies ACCA's use-of-force clause.
- Where it stands
- Case remanded
Remanded · May 4, 2020
- What it’s about
- The Court vacated the Ninth Circuit’s judgment and sent the case back for reconsideration in light of Borden v. United States.
- Who it affects
- For Pereda, the Supreme Court provided no answer on whether a crime that can be committed recklessly qualifies under ACCA's use-of-force clause.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
In Borden, the Court held that an offense that can be committed recklessly does not qualify as an ACCA violent felony under the statute’s “use of physical force” clause, favoring Pereda’s position.
The case concerned how the Armed Career Criminal Act treats crimes that can be committed with recklessness under its "use of physical force" clause.
Question presented
Whether the "use of physical force" clause in the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(i), encompasses crimes that can be committed with a mens rea of recklessness?
What the Court decided
Holding
Petition DENIED.
- Result
- Remanded
What's next
The Supreme Court has finished this docket action. No Supreme Court merits ruling on the ACCA question is recorded in this case.
Documents
Opinions
Key filings
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Show 7 moreShow fewer
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
New analysis added
Sources
Primary materials plus reporting. Best-effort analysis: this explainer relies on a mix of primary materials and trusted secondary sources. Official filings and opinions remain authoritative.