Retroactive robbery ruling
Aponte v. United States
In brief
- Where it stands
- Dismissed
Petition denied.
- What it’s about
- Ramon Aponte argued that a completed Hobbs Act robbery does not count as a “crime of violence” under a federal firearm law and that the lower courts wrongly denied him permission to appeal (a certificate of appealability).
- Who it affects
- Aponte did not get Supreme Court review, and the Court did not decide whether the robbery qualifies as a crime of violence or whether he should have been allowed to appeal.
Summary: written with AI from the case record.
What it's about
The Supreme Court refused to hear his case (denied the petition), so it did not decide those issues.
Aponte’s petition said the case raised a question left open after Taylor and asked the Court to address it or send the case back because he said he was wrongly denied permission to appeal.
Question presented
Whether the Court should decide the “question left open after Taylor,” Stoney, 62 F.4th at 113, or grant, vacate and remand given the erroneous denial of a COA on this undisputedly “debatable” issue. Miller-El, 537 U.S. at 336.
Documents
Docket activity
New analysis added
AI analysis generated: Case Briefing
AI analysis generated: Decision Record
Case data updated: summary, question_presented, generation_metadata
Case data updated: question_presented, extraction_metadata
Show 1 moreShow fewer
Brief added: Petition
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.