Golinveaux v. United States

by
The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of defendant's motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. 2255 in light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). The court held that when the record was inconclusive of what Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) clause was the basis of the sentencing enhancement, the second step is to determine the relevant legal environment at the time of sentencing. In this case, defendant had three predicate offenses at the time of her sentencing because her Iowa robbery conviction qualified as an ACCA predicate under the force clause. Therefore, defendant could not carry her section 2255 burden of showing by a preponderance of the evidence that the residual clause led the sentencing court to apply the ACCA enhancement. View "Golinveaux v. United States" on Justia Law