Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/boundvolumes/524bv.pdf
Page Number: 284

524US1

Unit: $U85

[09-14-00 16:49:41] PAGES PGT: OPIN

Cite as: 524 U. S. 236 (1998)

239

Opinion of the Court

ing applications for certiﬁcates of appealability. The Court,
we hold, does have jurisdiction.

I

In 1992, petitioner Arnold Hohn was charged with a num-
ber of drug-related offenses, including the use or carrying of
a ﬁrearm during and in relation to a drug trafﬁcking offense,
18 U. S. C. § 924(c)(1). Over defense counsel’s objection, the
District Court instructed the jury that “use” of a ﬁrearm
meant having the ﬁrearm “available to aid in the commission
of ” the offense. App. 7, 32. The jury convicted Hohn on all
counts. Hohn did not challenge the instruction in his direct
appeal, and the Court of Appeals afﬁrmed. United States v.
Hohn, 8 F. 3d 1301 (CA8 1993).

Two years after Hohn’s conviction became ﬁnal, we held
the term “use” in § 924(c)(1) required active employment of
the ﬁrearm. Proximity and accessibility alone were not suf-
ﬁcient. Bailey v. United States, 516 U. S. 137 (1995). Hohn
ﬁled a pro se motion under 28 U. S. C. § 2255 to vacate his
18 U. S. C. § 924(c)(1) conviction in light of Bailey on the
grounds the evidence presented at his trial was insufﬁcient
to prove use of a ﬁrearm. Although the Government con-
ceded the jury instruction given at Hohn’s trial did not com-
ply with Bailey, the District Court denied relief because, in
its view, Hohn had waived the claim by failing to challenge
the instruction on direct appeal.

While Hohn’s motion was pending before the District
Court, Congress enacted the Antiterrorism and Effective
Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA), 110 Stat. 1214. Sec-
tion 102 of AEDPA amends the statutory provision which
had required state prisoners to obtain a certiﬁcate of proba-
ble cause before appealing the denial of a habeas petition.
The amended provision provides:

“Unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certiﬁcate of
appealability, an appeal may not be taken to the court
of appeals from—