Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petitioner must affirmatively prove the sentencing court relied on the residual clause to be entitled to relief under Johnson v. United States
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW | (1) Whether, where the record is unclear, a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petitioner should be required to “affirmatively prove” that the sentencing court relied on the residual clause to determine that his prior offenses were violent felonies, before he is entitled to relief under Johnson v. United States, 185 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). (2) Whether a district court may rely on current law to evaluate whether a sentencing judge could have relied on the ACCA’s enumerated offense clause to determine that a defendant’s prior convictions qualified as violent felonies.
2019-06-20
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/1/2019.
2019-06-19
Reply of petitioner Darwin Zoch filed. (Distributed)
2019-05-31
Brief of respondent United States of America in opposition filed.
2019-04-25
Motion to extend the time to file a response is granted and the time is extended to and including May 31, 2019.
2019-04-24
Motion to extend the time to file a response from May 1, 2019 to May 31, 2019, submitted to The Clerk.
2019-04-01
Response Requested. (Due May 1, 2019)
2019-03-21
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/12/2019.
2019-03-12
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-03-04
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 5, 2019)