UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT ____________

No. 21-1784

___________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v.

GEORGE STONEY, a/k/a/ Butchy, Appellant

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (District Court No. 1-14-cr-00015-002) District Judge: Honorable Sylvia H. Rambo __________

Argued November 9, 2022

(Filed: March 10, 2023) Before: JORDAN, RESTREPO, and SCIRICA, Circuit Judges Daryl F. Bloom, Esq. OFFICE OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Middle District of Pennsylvania 228 Walnut Street, P.O. Box 11754 220 Federal Building and Courthouse Harrisburg, PA 17108 Stephen R. Cerutti, II, Esq. OFFICE OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Middle District of Pennsylvania 228 Walnut Street, P.O. Box 11754 220 Federal Building and Courthouse Harrisburg, PA 17108 Carlo D. Marchioli, Esq. [Argued] OFFICE OF UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Middle District of Pennsylvania 228 Walnut Street, P.O. Box 11754 220 Federal Building and Courthouse Harrisburg, PA 17108

Counsel for Appellee Frederick W. Ulrich, Esq. [Argued] OFFICE OF FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER 100 Chestnut Street Suite 306 Harrisburg, PA 17101

Counsel for Appellant George Stoney

2 __________

OPINION OF THE COURT _________ RESTREPO, Circuit Judge

Armed robbery is a violent crime. Accepting responsibility by a guilty plea does not diminish its seriousness. And it certainly does not permit a defendant to downplay the crime committed. George Stoney admitted to pointing a loaded firearm at victims during a robbery with two other masked men. The robbery was successful. We reject his attempt to minimize the crime he committed to avoid an additional felony conviction under § 924(c)(1)(A).

I. BACKGROUND

Stoney appeals the District Court’s denial of his second or successive motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, challenging his conviction for the Use of a Firearm During a Crime of Violence in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A). In 2014, Stoney pleaded guilty and admitted to committing a completed Hobbs Act robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a). But he now argues that we should treat his crime as an attempted Hobbs Act robbery, which fails to qualify as a predicate crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A) following the recent decision in United States v. Taylor, 142 S. Ct. 2015, 2021 (2022). Alternatively, he contends that even if we find he committed a completed Hobbs Act robbery, his conviction, based on

3 Pinkerton 1 liability and aiding and abetting, does not qualify as a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A).

A. STATUTORY FRAMEWORK

To evaluate Stoney’s appeal, we must look at § 1951 and § 924(c) generally. If a person is convicted of Hobbs Act robbery, he or she faces up to 20 years in prison. See 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a). If the offense also qualifies as a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A), the person faces an additional felony conviction and further punishment for using a firearm during the crime. See 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A); see also Taylor, 142 S. Ct. at 2019. Section 924(c) requires the government to prove that the person committed a qualifying predicate crime of violence. United States v. Galati, 844 F.3d 152, 155 (3d Cir. 2016). Nevertheless, a defendant need not be separately charged with or convicted of the predicate crime. Id. The statute defines a “crime of violence” to be “an offense that is a felony and has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person or property of another.” 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A). This clause is known as the “el