Whether the Fifth Circuit misapplied Beckles to Mr. Cheers's pre-Booker sentence in light of Supreme Court precedent

QUESTION PRESENTED I In Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) this Court initiated a twisting journey by holding unconstitutional the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii) based upon a lack of due process. The Fifth Circuit recently held that § 924(c)’s residual clause is unconstitutionally vague in United States v. Davis, 903 F.3d 483 (Sth Cir. 2018), currently before this Court, in light of the Supreme Court case Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018), which held the residual clause in 18 U.S.C. § 16(b)’s unconstitutionally vague. Mr. Cheers seeks to have this Court determine whether the § 924(c) count should be invalidated and whether the Fifth Circuit misapplied Beckles to Mr. Cheers’s pre-Booker sentence his case in light of Supreme Court precedent. 1