Source: https://warriorpublications.wordpress.com/2016/05/18/oso-blancos-sentence-could-be-reduced/
Timestamp: 2019-04-22 00:02:44+00:00

Document:
The Supreme Court recently ruled that the Armed Career Criminal Act is too vague under certain sentencing procedures. Well, whaddya know, Oso Blanco was sentenced under this. THIS IS THE BREAK WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING FOR OVER THE PAST 17 YEARS!!!
Thanks to fundraising efforts and donations from people like you, Oso Blanco was able to receive a partial assessment from a law firm [see details below]. Through this, and help from an awesome volunteer, we were able to figure out that Oso Blanco must file his appeal by June 25, 2016! As you may have heard, the “residual clause” of the armed career criminal act (ACCA) was declared “unconstitutionally vague” by the u.s. supreme court in Johnson v. u.s. Just last month, in April 2016, this ruling was declared “retroactive”, meaning that in can apply to old cases like that of Oso Blanco. However the deadline for appeals based on the Johnson decision is approaching.
Notes from Earth First! Journal, received from his support crew.
Visit http://freeosoblanco.blogspot.com to learn how you can support freedom for Oso Blanco.
From some lawyers to Oso Blanco: “Based on the research that I was able to complete in your case, I encourage you to file motion under 28 USC § 2244 in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals seeking authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion based upon the new rule of constitutional law articulated in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551, 192 L. Ed. 2d 569 (2015). The Johnson Court declared that a key clause defining violent offenses in the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”) violated “the Constitution’s prohibition of vague criminal laws.” Id., 135 S. Ct. at 2563. Since that time, numerous courts have applied Johnson to other statutes containing a similar clause defining crimes of violence and granted relief to those inmates. This includes inmates who received the Career Offender enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 and inmates convicted of using a firearm during a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3). In fact, a district court in the Eastern District of California recently dismissed charges under § 924(c) on the grounds that § 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague. See United States v. Lattanaphom, Case No. 99-cr-0433 (E.D. CA, Feb. 16, 2016).
Posted on May 18, 2016, in Warrior and tagged EZLN, Oso Blanco, political prisoner, Zapatista Army of National Liberation, Zapatistas. Bookmark the permalink.	Leave a comment.

References: v. 
 § 2244
 § 2255
 v. 
 § 4
 § 924
 § 924
 § 924
 v.