Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-16-02105/USCOURTS-ca10-16-02105-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Marcello Jimenez
Petitioner

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

_________________________________

In re: MARCELLO JIMENEZ, 

 Movant.

No. 16-2105

(D.C. Nos. 2:08-CV-00331-RB-WDS &

2:03-CR-01832-RB-1)

(D. N.M.)

_________________________________

ORDER

_________________________________

Before KELLY, HARTZ, and MATHESON, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________

Movant Marcello Jimenez, 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 2005, 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 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3006A, Cori Ann Harbour-Valdez is appointed as 

counsel for Marcello Jimenez effective nunc pro tunc to the date the request for 

authorization to file a second or successive § 2255 motion was filed in this court.

FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

June 3, 2016

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

Appellate Case: 16-2105 Document: 01019631681 Date Filed: 06/03/2016 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 Marcello Jimenez authorization to file a second or 

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

States.

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 16-2105 Document: 01019631681 Date Filed: 06/03/2016 Page: 2