Whether the concurrent sentence doctrine should be applied to deny § 2255 relief

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW (1) Whether the concurrent sentence doctrine should be applied to deny § | 2255 relief when one of a set of multiple sentences is now invalid because of a new | rule of constitutional law made retroactive on collateral review by the Supreme | Court that was previously unavailable? , | (2) Whether application of Johnson v. United States, 1385 S. Ct. 2551 | (2015), to the virtually identical residual clause in 18 U.S.C. § 3559(), requires a | new rule of constitutional law, or merely requires a straightforward application of | Johnson’s reasoning to that statute. |