our eighth case for this morning is shields against united states good morning or honors ernest shields was brought to the motion under twenty two fifty five that's how the case finds its way here is the sentencing issue under the armed group criminal act and the question is i'm aware that the seventh circuit has addressed this issue in smith versus united states that was addressed after the filing of this brief however i would still argue respectfully that the definition of swelling that's applicable to the residential burglary statute takes this case out of generic burglary and i kept in mind in saying that the mathis case because in mathis of course of the michigan burglary statute failed that's a generic burglary because it included cars and airplanes other things like that so i will to assure you mr kennedy that you have preserved this argument for further action of whatever thing in the smith decision  that in my brief anyway moving along to the armed robbery aspect of this good again is that a crime of violence johnson of course requires violent force son is thirty seven years before the supreme court case in johnson so what about the career fender decision in united states again that's that we've said the language is basically the same so even if we thought dickerson was you know too out of date to be helpful haven't we said that the illinois robbery statute satisfies de curtis johnson two thousand i think of it as johnson two thousand and ten standard i don't specifically i don't remember that specific case and sure ga illinois there are three kinds of at least three times of robbery aggravated robbery the perpetrator announces to the victim in one way or another that he has a weapon i have a gun i have a knife i'm going to hurt you close to being the generic offense of armed robbery anyway one does not have to communicate to the victim that one is armed you know annoying if you have a gun hidden if the perpetrator has a gun hidden and himself never mentions it but armed some but rob someone that is considered armed robbery even though the fact of the weapon is never communicated why is the communication important they both require the use or threaten  force so why what's your argument that the victim's knowledge that force is being used to suppose that something that looks like you know a stuffed animal but it's actually a gun  and so force is being used against the victim victim doesn't know what would you say that doesn't count is armed robbery or is aggravated robbery for that matter aggravated wouldn't because you would be ten why would that be armed robbery when a gun is being pointed somebody that looks like a bunny oh when a gun is being pointed at somebody it would be a it is armed robbery yes but i'm just saying the victim doesn't realize that that thing is a gun in my head pathetical well if the victim doesn't do what you know it won't matter right victim doesn't have to know exactly so why and why wouldn't that still be something that meets the definition of the curtis johnson case because use of force is one of the elements  involves overcover coming there will but the actual fact whether a gun is there or not does doesn't really matter as far as i can see for generic robbery but the element and so the question is why isn't that plainly the case for the illinois aggravated and armed robbery cases here it's armed robbery the illinois law requires the prosecutor to proof of force w because there are very different things or threatened yeah and i'm working off a generic routine eric definition of robbery because we have to go conviction on until you've proven the use or threatened use of force in illinois and so knowing that sitting to the elements part of the definition of the crime of violence that we're looking for for the career c person it's such a fine distinction that the argument is it defeats the argument that robbery is no noise robbery is generic robbery deal and i armed robbery which is what we're looking for  don't know what else i don't know how else to say it in about one thirty two if you would like to just reflection and wait for rebuttal that would be fine but i think we have thank you see where you're going thank you that robbery under illinois as a violent felony and has done so even after the supreme court's case includes johnson the child or alice case which judge would you mentioned this court held that robbery under illinois law qualified as a crime of violence under the sentencing guidelines because takings without any force or violence are considered theft under the law or not robbery defense counsel maintains that that the decision in childhood were also somehow depended on it being aggravated robbery conviction that's not what the court said in that case in fact with the court said was the fact that it was an aggravated robbery conviction was an additional reason why the the conviction in that case qualified as a crime of violence and that was also in subsequent cases the published opinion in united states versus van sac the court said the same thing so under illinois law a robbery requires force that is actual while it's physically applied or putting the victim in fear as to overpower his will that is sufficient to satisfy the supreme court's standard in curtis johnson so unless the court has any questions i will end by asking you to affirm the judgment of its record and apparently apparent thanks as well to the government