Opinion ID: 3153279
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Pro Se Supplemental Claims

Text: MacArthur brings several pro se supplemental claims, none of which merit relief. In these claims, MacArthur seeks relief from an enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e). MacArthur, however, was not sentenced pursuant to that statute. Nor did his enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1 rely on the residual clause contained in the definition of crime of violence under § 4B1.2(a)(2). His challenges based on the Supreme Court's decisions in Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 - 12 - (1990), and Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), are, therefore, meritless. Lastly, MacArthur uses Johnson to attack the Maine state burglary statute, asserting that the statute is both unconstitutionally vague and indivisible. To the extent MacArthur seeks to collaterally challenge his prior state court convictions in this appeal, we have no jurisdiction to entertain such claims. His argument, moreover, that the Maine state burglary statute is indivisible fails for the reasons provided above.