Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-16-02098/USCOURTS-ca10-16-02098-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jacob Ramon Silva
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

_________________________________ 

In re: JACOB RAMON SILVA, 

 Movant. 

No. 16-2098 

(D.C. No2. 1:14-CV-00101-JCH-LAM & 

1:07-CR-00787-JCH-1) 

(D. N.M.) 

_________________________________ 

ORDER

_________________________________ 

Before BRISCOE, GORSUCH, and BACHARACH, Circuit Judges. 

_________________________________ 

Movant Jacob Ramon Silva, a federal prisoner proceeding through counsel, seeks 

an order authorizing him to file a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion in the 

district court so he may assert a claim for relief based on Johnson v. United States, 135 S. 

Ct. 2551 (2015).1

 See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255(h), 2244(b)(3). In 2008, Movant was convicted 

of a firearms offense in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). He alleges that his sentence for 

that offense was enhanced under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) based on his 

having three qualifying prior convictions, see 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1), at least one of which 

was a violent felony. Movant now seeks to file a § 2255 motion challenging his 

enhanced sentence based on the Supreme Court’s opinion in Johnson, which invalidated 

the residual clause in the ACCA’s definition of “violent felony” as unconstitutionally 

vague. 

 1

 The Federal Public Defender for the District of New Mexico is appointed to 

represent Jacob Ramon Silva pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A(a)(2)(B). 

FILED 

United States Court of Appeals 

Tenth Circuit 

May 24, 2016

Elisabeth A. Shumaker 

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 16-2098 Document: 01019626757 Date Filed: 05/24/2016 Page: 1 
2 

To obtain authorization, Movant must make a prima facie showing that his claim 

meets the gatekeeping requirements of § 2255(h). See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(C). 

Relevant here is the requirement that the claim rely on “a new rule of constitutional law, 

made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously 

unavailable,” 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h)(2). Based on the information before us, we conclude 

that the Movant has made the required showing. Johnson announced a new rule of 

constitutional law, and the Supreme Court made Johnson retroactive to cases on 

collateral review in Welch v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1257, 1265 (2016). 

Accordingly, we grant Jacob Ramon Silva authorization to file a second or 

successive § 2255 motion in the district court to raise a claim based on Johnson v. United 

States. 

Entered for the Court 

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk 

Appellate Case: 16-2098 Document: 01019626757 Date Filed: 05/24/2016 Page: 2