Court Opinion

ID: 9366234
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-26 15:04:03.522905+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:15:51.246210
License: Public Domain

Case: 21-11099     Document: 00516429382          Page: 1    Date Filed: 08/11/2022

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit                             United States Court of Appeals
                                                                              Fifth Circuit

                                                                            FILED
                                                                      August 11, 2022
                                   No. 21-11099                        Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                            Clerk

   United States of America,

                                                             Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                       versus

   Terrell M. Clark,

                                                         Defendant—Appellant.

                  Appeal from the United States District Court
                      for the Northern District of Texas
                            USDC No. 4:19-CV-1071

   Before Higginbotham, Graves, and Ho, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam:*
          Terrell M. Clark pleaded guilty to theft of firearms from a licensed
   firearms dealer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(m) and brandishing a firearm
   during a crime of violence in relation to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii).
   Following the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct.

          *
            Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this
   opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited
   circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.
Case: 21-11099     Document: 00516429382           Page: 2   Date Filed: 08/11/2022

                                    No. 21-11099

   2319 (2019), we vacated Clark’s §924(c) conviction as his underlying firearm
   theft was no longer deemed to be a crime of violence.
          Clark moved for a certificate of innocence under 28 U.S.C. § 2513,
   which would enable him to bring a claim for damages for unjust conviction
   and imprisonment in the United States Court of Federal Claims under 28
   U.S.C. § 1495. The district court denied his motion.
          Clark is not entitled to a certificate of innocence because he cannot
   meet the requirements of § 2513(a)(2), which requires that Clark prove that
   he did not commit any of the acts charged or that none of his acts constituted
   an offense against the United States. Although his § 924(c) conviction was
   vacated, Clark’s § 924(m) conviction remains. Thus, his acts constituted an
   offense against the United States, barring him from obtaining a certificate of
   innocence. See Osborn v. United States, 322 F.2d 835, 841–43 (5th Cir. 1963).
          The order of the district court, denying the motion for a certificate of
   innocence, is AFFIRMED.

                                         2