FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T MARCH 28, 2011 J OHN L EY CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE U

NITED STATE S COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 1 0- 11 12 8 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNos . 1: 09 -cv -2 09 75 -PCH & 1: 06 -cr- 20 44 9- PCH-1
JOHNNY EDWARD KING, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pet it io ne r-Ap pe ll an t,

ve rs us UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l ll Defen da nt -Ap pe ll ee.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co urt forth e So ut he rnDis tri ctof F lo rid a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ (Ma rch 28 , 20 11 ) Befo re TJ OFLAT, W ILSON an d F AY, Circ ui t Jud ge s. PER CURI AM:Jo hn ny EdwardKin g, a f ed eral pri so ne r, ap pe al s the di st ric t co urt’s d en ia l of hi s m ot io n t o v acat e, se t as id e, orco rrec t s en te nc e, fi le d p ur su an t t o 2 8 U.S.C. § 2 25 5. We gran te d acert ifi cat e o f ap pe al ab il it y to ad dr es s the qu es ti on of whe th er the di st ric t co urt erredinde te rm in in g t ha t the actua l-i nn oc en ce ex cep ti on to th e p ro cedur al -d efau ltrul e d oe s n otap pl y to Kin g’s cl ai m

th athi s n on -cap it al se nt en ce u nd er the Arm edCare er Cr im in al Act o f 19 84 (“ ACCA”) , 18 U.S.C. § 9 24 (e)( 1) , vi ol at edhi s ri gh t t o due pro ces s. Kin g a ckno wled ge s tha t h e pr oc edur al ly defau lt edhi s cl ai m th athe was i ll eg al ly sen te nc edun de r th e ACCA by fail in g t o ra is e iton di rectap pe al , bu t h e co nt en ds th atth e d is tri ctco urt’s fai lu re t o a ddres s h is cla im res ul te d i n afun dam en ta l m is carr ia ge of ju st ic e be cau se he was i ne li gi bl e fo r, an d, the refo re, actua ll y in no cen t o f, th e ACCA se nt en ce en ha nc em en t. He arg ue s tha t the actua l-i nn oc en ce ex cep ti on to th e pr oc edur al -d efau ltrul e sh ou ldbe ex te nd edto ap pl y to ch al le ng es to no n- cap it al se nt en ces be cau se de ath i s n otdi ffer en t fr om no n- cap it al sen te nc es for pu rp os es of en fo rci ng ha be as co rp us rul es .
“ Whe n re vi ewin g t he di st ric t co urt’s d en ia l o f a § 22 55 m ot io n, we re vi ew fin di ng s o f fac t fo r cl ear e rro r an d que st io ns of l aw de no vo .” Rho de v. Uni te d St at es , 58 3 F .3d12 89 , 12 90 (11 th Cir . 20 09 ). A pri so ne r who fai ls to rai se an is su e o n d ire ctap pe al is pro cedur al ly barre d fr om rai si ng th atcla im

ina § 2 25 5 2m ot io n, ab se nta sh owi ng of c au se an d p reju di ce o r a fu nd am en ta l m is carr ia ge of

jus ti ce. Jo nes v. Un it ed

Stat es , 15 3 F .3d13 05 , 13 07 (11 th Cir . 19 98 ). A pe ti ti on er m ay

sh ow a f un da m en ta l m is carr ia ge of ju st ic e b y de m on st rat in g t ha t “ a co ns ti tu ti on al vi ol at io n h as pro babl y res ul te d i n t he co nv ic ti on of o ne who is actua ll y in no cen t.” Lyn n v . Uni te d Sta tes , 36 5 F .3d12 25 , 12 34 (11 th Cir . 20 04 ). The Supr em e Co urt h as reco gn iz edth ata pe ti ti on er wh o i s g ui lty of a n o ffen se an d s en te nc edto de ath c ansh ow a f un da m en ta l m is carr ia ge of ju st ic e b y de m on st rat in g t ha t, b utfora co ns ti tu ti on al erro r, he is actua ll y in no cen t o f th e cap it al sen te nc e. Se e S

aw yer v. W hi tl ey , 50 5 U.S. 3 33 , 33 6, 1 12 S.Ct . 25 14 , 25 17 , 12 0 L.Ed .2d26 9 (1 99 2) . A pet it io ne r m ay est ab li sh actua l i nn oc en ce i n t he cap it al -s en te nc in g c on te xtby dem on st rat in g t ha t, “bu t fo r a co ns ti tu ti on al erro r, no reas on ab le juro r wou ldha ve fou nd[hi m ] el ig ib le forth e d eath p en al ty und er the ap pl ic ab le . . . la w.” Id. Inli gh t o f th e Gov ern m en t’s co nc es si on on ap pe al th atth e actua l-i nn oc en ce ex cep ti on sh ou ldbe av ai labl e to pe ti ti on ers rai si ng pro cedur al ly defau lt edcla im s ch al le ng in g n on -cap it al sen te nc es en ha nc edun de r th e ACCA, we rem an d Ki ng ’s cas e to th e d is tri ctco urt fo r a d et erm in at io n o f whe th er Ki ng is actua ll y in no cen t of th e ACCA s en te nc e en ha nc em en t. VACATED AN D REMANDED. 3