1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

USA,

Plaintiff,

v.

NOTTINGHAM,

Defendant.

Case Nos. 09-cr-00218-SI-1 

14-cr-00553-SI-1

ORDER GRANTING STAY

Re: Dkt. No. 42 in 09-cr-00218-SI-1 

Dkt. No. 30 in 14-cr-00553-SI-1

Before the Court is the government’s motion to stay this 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding 

pending the United States Supreme Court’s resolution of Beckles v. United States, No. 15-8544 

(cert. granted June 27, 2016), which considers: (1) whether the holding of Johnson v. United 

States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), applies retroactively to collateral cases challenging federal 

sentences enhanced under the residual clause in United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.) 

§ 4B1.2(a)(2) (defining “crime of violence”); (2) whether Johnson’s constitutional holding applies 

to the residual clause in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2), thereby rendering challenges to sentences 

enhanced under it cognizable on collateral review; and (3) whether possession of a sawed-off 

shotgun, an offense listed as a “crime of violence” only in commentary to U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2, 

remains a “crime of violence” after Johnson. See Gov’t Mot. to Stay at 1; Brief of Petitioner at 2, 

Beckles v. United States, No. 15-8544.

The Ninth Circuit recently began inviting district courts to stay § 2255 proceedings 

pending that court’s decisions in 15-72559, Gardner v. United States, and 15-73302, Jacob v. 

United States. See 09-cr-00624-SI at Dkt. No. 67, Order Staying Case; see also United States v. 

Bacon, 2016 WL 4071975, at *2 (E.D. Wash. July 28, 2016). The Ninth Circuit’s Gardner and 

Jacob cases are both cases which present the issue of whether Johnson applies to the Guidelines. 

Case 3:09-cr-00218-SI Document 45 Filed 08/05/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

Bacon, 2016 WL 4071975, at *2. On June 27, 2016, an Order was issued in both Gardner and 

Jacob which stated: “Submission of these cases is deferred pending decision of the Supreme Court 

in Beckles v. United States, No. 15-8544 (cert. granted June 27, 2016). Id. It appears the Ninth 

Circuit will not rule on the issue of whether the Johnson analysis applies to the Guidelines, but 

rather will await the Supreme Court’s determination in Beckles. Id.

This Court will follow suit. Nottingham’s § 2255 challenge squarely falls within what 

Beckles will ultimately decide; the basis for relief asserted is that Nottingham’s multiple 

convictions for unarmed bank robbery do not qualify as crimes of violence following Johnson. 

Def. 2255 Mot. at 3. Briefing in Beckles is complete and the Supreme Court will likely decide the 

case by the June 2017 term. Nottingham’s release date without relief is August 26, 2021. Oppo. 

to Mot. to Stay at 6. While the Court understands the serious liberty interests at stake, staying the 

present proceedings pending the resolution of Beckles with ensure the durability of any decision 

by this Court in Nottingham’s case. Any decision by this Court, if appealed, would likely result in 

a stay at the appellate level as discussed above. If the Supreme Court decides that Johnson is 

retroactive to the Guidelines, then this Court may decide the issues raised by the motion without 

the delay caused by a remand from the court of appeals.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 5, 2016

______________________________________

SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:09-cr-00218-SI Document 45 Filed 08/05/16 Page 2 of 2