Source: http://in.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20170417_0000482.NIN.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2018-01-23 19:21:04
Document Index: 57214793

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

Defendant Joseph Luna's Motion to Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [ECF No. 472] is pending before this Court. The basis for the Defendant's Motion is the Supreme Court's holding in Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015), striking down as unconstitutionally vague the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii). The Defendant argues that in light of Johnson, his sentence, which involved a Guideline enhancement under the identically worded residual clause of U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2), is unlawful. He asks to be re-sentenced without the enhancement.
On March 20, 2017, the Defendant filed a Motion to Withdraw Motion to Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [ECF No. 481], citing to the Supreme Court's decision in Beckles. As the Defendant states, “it is futile” for him “to continue with his Motion to Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 based upon Johnson.” (Mot. to Withdraw 2.)
For the reasons stated above, the Court WITHHOLDS ruling on the Defendant's Motion to Withdraw Motion to Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [ECF No. 481]. If, by June 16, 2017, the Court does not receive a supplement from the Defendant indicating otherwise, the Court will presume that the Defendant still intends to withdraw his Motion to Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 [ECF No. 472]. The procedural impact of withdrawing the Motion to Correct Sentence will not be definitively determined unless and until the Defendant attempts to file another habeas motion.