Opinion ID: 2757999
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Element of Force

Text: Having determined that § 76-5-102(1)(c) in the underlying assault statute does not satisfy the generic offense of aggravated assault, we must next determine whether § 76-5-102(1)(c) necessarily “has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another.” 38 An assault under the plain terms of § 76-5-102(1)(c) may include 34 Id. 35 Id. at 231. 36 State v. Wareham, 143 P.3d 302, 304, 308 (Utah Ct. App. 2006) (internal quotation marks omitted) (reviewing for plain error and citing both the threat and creation of risk portions of the assault statute). 37 See Esparza-Perez, 681 F.3d at 231. The Model Penal Code defines reckless endangerment as “recklessly engag[ing] in conduct which places or may place another person in danger of death or serious bodily injury.” Model Penal Code § 211.2. The Model Penal Code does not provide for reckless endangerment as a basis for aggravated assault. 38 U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment. n.1(B)(iii). 11 Case: 14-40019 Document: 00512858868 Page: 12 Date Filed: 12/05/2014 No. 14-40019 either “an act, committed with unlawful force or violence” that either “causes bodily injury to another or creates a substantial risk of bodily injury to another.” 39 Although the statute requires that “force or violence” be used, the use of the words “force or violence” is not dispositive of whether an offense is a crime of violence. 40 By its plain language, the underlying assault statute does not necessarily require that the unlawful force or violence be directed “against the person of another” for creation of a risk of injury. The analysis is not changed by the aggravated assault statute’s requirement that a dangerous weapon be used. Because § 76-5-102(1)(c) does not necessarily require the use of physical force against the person of another, we conclude that it cannot be a crime of violence under that test.