Case Name: Charles J. WEBER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2017-10-19
Citations: 698 F. App'x 860
Docket Number: No. 16-2150
Parties: Charles J. WEBER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
Judges: Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 698
Pages: 860–860

Head Matter:
Charles J. WEBER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.
No. 16-2150
United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.
Submitted: October 12, 2017
Filed: October 19, 2017
Laine Cardarella, Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO, for appellant.
Phillip Eugene (Gene) Porter, Asst. U.S. ' Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.
Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Federal prisoner Charles Weber, who pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm, appeals from the order of the District Court denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion that challenged his sentence under Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015) (invalidating the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act as unconstitutionally vague). Specifically, Weber challenged his increased offense level under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1. After de novo review, we conclude that the District Court properly denied relief because Weber's sentence was calculated under the advisory Guidelines, which are not subject to void-for-vagueness challenges. See Beckles v. United States, 580 U.S. -, 137 S.Ct. 886, 895, 197 L.Ed.2d 145 (2017). Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel's motion to withdraw.
. The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.