The Supreme Court has once again set its sights on the “categorical approach” to sentencing enhancements, a method that has long been a subject of debate among the legal community. Under Section 924(c) of the federal criminal code, a mandatory consecutive sentence is imposed for using or carrying a firearm during a “crime of violence,” which involves the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force. The categorical approach evaluates the statutory elements of a crime rather than the actual conduct of the defendant.
This approach has led to divergent court opinions on its application, particularly in cases where crimes involve bodily injury or death through inaction, such as failing to provide necessary care. In one notable case, Salvatore Delligatti was convicted of attempted murder in aid of racketeering. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit ruled that such a crime is inherently a “crime of violence,” even if it could be committed without direct action by the defendant.
Delligatti has petitioned the Supreme Court to clarify whether a crime requiring proof of bodily injury or death but possibly committed by inaction should fall under this definition. The United States government supports further review, arguing that the categorical approach is appropriate but that, based on the actual facts, the 2nd Circuit’s decision was correct.
The Supreme Court’s decision on this issue could have significant implications for the application of sentencing enhancements under federal law, affecting numerous cases involving the categorical approach to defining “crimes of violence.”