October Term 2018 · Docket 17-5554

Does slight force qualify as a violent felony?

The dispute centers on whether Florida robbery requires violent force for federal sentencing enhancements.

Official caption
Stokeling v. United States
Latest argument session
Latest official Court activity
Latest verified event
Argued
Sources analyzed through
Official Transcript

Verified source milestones

  1. — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.

The arguments, in order

This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.

  1. Argument 1 ·

    What happened at the argument

    the side that brought the case argued Florida robbery requires only slight force.

    Government argued common law distinguishes violent takings from non-violent ones.

    questions_asked_by_justices

    Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details

    Sources used for this argument breakdown

A citizen's guide to the whole case

What this case is about

The case tests the definition of violent force under federal law.

Official sources for this section

How the case got here

The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 9, 2018.

Official sources for this section

What each side wants

the side that brought the case seeks exclusion of Florida robbery from violent felony status.

Government seeks inclusion of Florida robbery as a violent felony.

Official sources for this section

What each side says

the side that brought the case argues Florida robbery lacks the required violent force element.

Government argues common law defines robbery as overcoming victim resistance.

Official sources for this section

What the justices asked

Justice Alito asked if pinching constitutes sufficient physical force.

Justice Sotomayor asked if ordinary pinching qualifies as violent force.

Official sources for this section

Why it matters

This definition determines federal sentencing enhancements for repeat offenders.

Official sources for this section

What happens next

This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.

Official sources for this section

Official Court provenance

Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page

Title and summary sources

Revision history

  1. Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.

  2. Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·

    Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.

Download this sanitized case as JSON