Source: http://tn.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20190725_0000692.WTN.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-09-21 10:01:10
Document Index: 417292442

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 2255', '§ 2255', '§ 922', '§ 922', '§ 924', '§ 4', '§ 2255']

FindACase™ | Crews v. United States
MICHAEL CREWS, Movant,
Before the Court is a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 filed by the Movant, Michael Crews. For the reasons stated below, the Court DENIES the § 2255 motion.
On July 18, 2005, a federal grand jury returned an indictment charging Crews in count one with possessing a firearm after conviction of a felony, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g). Count three of the indictment charged Crews and two co-defendants with knowingly receiving and possessing stolen firearms, in violation of §§ 922(j) and 924(a)(2).[1] Crews entered a guilty plea to counts one and three on October 3, 2005. At the sentencing hearing on January 5, 2006, the Court determined that Crews qualified for an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). See also U.S.S.G. § 4B1.4. He was sentenced to a 180-month term of imprisonment and a four-year term of supervised release.[2] The sentence was affirmed on direct appeal. United States v. Crews, No. 06-5133 (6th Cir. Mar. 13, 2008).
Crews subsequently filed the present motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, contending that his sentence is invalid under the decision in Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015). (ECF No. 1.) The Bureau of Prisons Inmate Locator[3] shows that Crews was released from prison on July 3, 2018; therefore, he currently is serving his supervised release.
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The ACCA requires a fifteen-year sentence for a felon who is convicted of unlawfully possessing a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. &sect; 922(g) and who has three prior convictions &ldquo;for a violent felony or a serious drug offense, or both.&rdquo; 18 U.S.C. &sect; 924(e)(1). The ACCA defines &ldquo;violent felony&rdquo; as &ldquo;any crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year&rdquo; that (1) &ldquo;has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another&rdquo; (the &ldquo;elements clause&rdquo;), (2) &ldquo;is burglary, arson, or extortion, involves use of explosives&rdquo; (the &ldquo;enumerated offenses clause&rdquo;), or (3) &ldquo;otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another&rdquo; (the &ldquo;residual clause&rdquo;). Id., &sect; 924(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii). In Johnson v. United States, the Supreme Court held the ACCA's residual clause is unconstitutionally vague and that increasing a defendant's sentence under the clause is, therefore, a denial of due process. 135 S.Ct. ...