Potts v. United States
In brief
The Supreme Court refused to hear Potts's case, so the Sixth Circuit judgment remains in place without a Supreme Court ruling on the sentencing question.
- Where it stands
- Decided
Decided · May 4, 2020
- What it’s about
- The Court denied Potts’s petition for review, leaving the Sixth Circuit’s judgment in favor of the United States in place.
- Who it affects
- For Potts, the Sixth Circuit judgment remains in place, but the Supreme Court did not decide how Florida aggravated assault should be treated under the federal sentencing guidelines.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
Potts had challenged how the district court handled the mandatory consecutive sentence required for aggravated identity theft under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A.
Potts challenged how the district court handled a sentence for aggravated identity theft that federal law required to run after another sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 1028A.
Potts's petition argued that Supreme Court review was needed to resolve disagreement among federal appeals courts over this sentencing question.
Question presented
Whether the Florida offense of aggravated assault, Fla. Stat. § 784.021, is a “crime of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(1).
What the Court decided
Holding
Petition DENIED.
What's next
The Supreme Court docket action is complete, and Potts's case remains governed by the Sixth Circuit judgment.
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
More questions
- When did the Supreme Court deny the petition?
- The docket records show that the Court refused to hear it on May 4, 2020.
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.