Whether the Eleventh Circuit's denial of a certificate of appealability is in conflict with this Court's precedent when reasonable jurists are currently debating whether § 924(c)'s residual clause, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(8)(B), is unconstitutionally vague after Samuel Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) and Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018)

QUESTION PRESENTED FOR REVIEW 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) criminalizes possessing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. A first conviction carries a five-year mandatory minimum penalty. This petition presents the following question: Whether the Eleventh Circuit’s denial of a certificate of appealability is in conflict with this Court’s precedent when reasonable jurists are currently debating whether § 924(c)’s residual clause, 18 U.S.C. § 924(¢)(8)(B), is unconstitutionally vague after Samuel Johnson v. United States, 135 8. Ct. 2551 (2015) and Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018)? ii INTERESTED PARTIES There are no