Source: http://tn.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20161206_0001267.ETN.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2017-11-22 10:42:35
Document Index: 117508952

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 2113', '§ 2255', '§ 924', '§ 4']

TIMOTHY HANDLEY, Petitioner,
Before the Court is Petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [Doc. 26]. The United States responded in opposition on August 26, 2016 [Doc. 28]. Petitioner did not reply and the time for doing so has now passed. E.D. Tenn. L.R. 7.1, 7.2. During pendency of the petition, Petitioner filed a request that this Court stay resolution of the action pending the Supreme Court's decision in Beckles v. United States, No. 15-8544, 2016 WL 1029080 (U.S. June 27, 2016) [Doc. 29]. For the reasons below, Petitioner's request for a stay pending Beckles will be DENIED as moot and § 2255 motion will be DENIED and DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
In 2007, Petitioner pled guilty to committing armed bank robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) [Doc. 12; Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) ¶¶ 1-2]. Petitioner faced a statutory penalty of up to twenty-five years' imprisonment [Id. ¶ 55]. Based on four prior Tennessee convictions-one for aggravated burglary [Id. ¶ 26], one for simple burglary [Id. ¶ 27], and two for aggravated robbery [Id. ¶¶ 31-32], the United States Probation Office deemed Petitioner to be a career offender under Section 4B1.1 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines [Id. ¶ 19]; this Court agreed, sentenced Petitioner to a 200-month term [Doc. 18].
Petitioner appealed, but the Sixth Circuit affirmed his conviction and sentence [Doc. 22]. The Supreme Court denied Petitioner's request for a writ of certiorari on October 5, 2009 [Doc. 25]; Petitioner's conviction became final for purposes of § 2255(f)(1) on that same date. See, e.g., Clay v. United States, 537 U.S. 522, 525, 532 (2003) (explaining that in the case of a direct appeal a petitioner's conviction becomes final upon denial of certiorari). The United States Supreme Court decided Johnson v. United States-invalidating the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)-on June 26, 2015. 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015). Petitioner filed the instant petition for collateral relief less than one year later [Doc. 26 (challenging his career offender enhancement in light of the Johnson decision)].
Petitioner articulates a single ground for relief, arguing that the Johnson decision removed an undisclosed number of prior convictions from Section 4B1.2's definition of “crime of violence” and that he no longer has sufficient predicates for enhancement [Doc. 26].
Section 4B1.1 classifies a defendant as a career offender if (1) he or she was at least eighteen years old at the time the defendant committed the instant offense; (2) the instant offense of conviction is a felony that is either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense; and (3) he or she has at least two prior felony convictions of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense. U.S. Sentencing Manual § 4B1.1(a). Only Petitioner's satisfaction of the third prong-possession of two qualifying predicate convictions-is disputed [Doc. 26].