Opinion ID: 3169659
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Retroactivity of Alleyne

Text: Walker’s collateral attack on her sentence—which became final on direct review before the decision in Alleyne—is governed by Teague. See Whorton v. Bockting, 549 U.S. 406, 416 (2007) (explaining Teague “laid out the framework to” use in deciding if a rule announced in a Supreme Court opinion applies “retroactively to judgments in criminal cases that are already final on direct review”); Becht v. United States, 403 F.3d 541, 545 n.3 (8th Cir. 2005) (recognizing we generally must determine whether a petitioner’s § 2255 “motion is barred by the rule on retroactivity announced in Teague”). Under Teague, Supreme Court decisions that create “new constitutional rules of criminal procedure” generally do not apply “to those cases which have become final before the new rules are announced.” Teague, 489 U.S. at 310. “Teague stated two exceptions: ‘[W]atershed rules of criminal procedure’ and rules placing ‘conduct beyond the power of the [government] to proscribe.’” Chaidez v. United States, 568 U.S. ___, ___, 133 S. Ct. 1103, 1107 n.3 (2013) (alterations in original) (quoting Teague, 489 U.S. at 311). Walker contends “Alleyne should be applied retroactively to [her] case because it was a watershed exception.” Relying on pre-Teague cases like Hankerson v. North Carolina, 432 U.S. 233, 243 (1977), Ivan V. v. City of New York, 407 U.S. 203, 205 -6- (1972) (per curiam), and In re Winship, 397 U.S. 358, 367-68 (1970), Walker asserts “[t]he reasonable doubt rule of Alleyne is a ‘watershed rule’ because its very point is to protect the innocent and balance the contest between government and accused.” We disagree. The Supreme Court “give[s] retroactive effect to only a small set of ‘watershed rules of criminal procedure implicating the fundamental fairness and accuracy of the criminal proceeding.’” Schriro v. Summerlin, 542 U.S. 348, 352 (2004) (quoting Saffle v. Parks, 494 U.S. 484, 495 (1990)). “[T]o qualify as watershed, a . . . rule must be necessary to prevent ‘an impermissibly large risk’ of an inaccurate” outcome and “must ‘alter our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements essential to the fairness of a proceeding.’” Whorton, 549 U.S. at 418 (quoting Schriro, 542 U.S. at 352). Explaining the exception is “extremely narrow” and observing “it is unlikely that any such rules have yet to emerge,” the Supreme Court has, “in the years since Teague, . . . rejected every claim that a new rule satisfied the requirements for watershed status.” Id. at 417-18 (quoting Schriro, 542 U.S. at 352) (internal marks omitted). To date, neither the Supreme Court nor this court has “held that Alleyne applies retroactively” on collateral review. Thompson v. Roy, 793 F.3d 843, 846 (8th Cir. 2015); accord Simpson v. United States, 721 F.3d 875, 876 (7th Cir. 2013). And, as Walker concedes, every circuit court to consider this issue has concluded Alleyne does not apply retroactively. See, e.g., Butterworth v. United States, 775 F.3d 459, 464-65 (1st Cir. 2015); United States v. Olvera, 775 F.3d 726, 730 & n.12 (5th Cir. 2015) (listing cases from eight circuits). -7- Although the circumstances and analysis have varied, the circuit courts have agreed that even if Alleyne announced a new rule,5 the decision is not the rare exception that announced a watershed rule of criminal procedure that “‘alter[ed] our understanding of the bedrock procedural elements’ of the adjudicatory process.” United States v. Winkelman, 746 F.3d 134, 136 (3d Cir. 2014) (quoting Teague, 489 U.S. at 311); accord Hughes v. United States, 770 F.3d 814, 818-19 (9th Cir. 2014). In reaching that conclusion, the circuit courts have noted Alleyne was an extension of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000), in which the Supreme Court held “[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.” See, e.g., Jeanty v. Warden, FCI-Miami, 757