Whether a criminal defendant moving for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 can satisfy his burden of proof by showing his sentence may have been based on an unconstitutional provision and exceeds the statutory maximum

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Whether a criminal defendant moving for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, based on a retroactive constitutional decision invalidating a federal statutory provision, can satisfy his burden of proof by showing his sentence may have been based on the unconstitutional provision, and his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum under current law. Whether a Florida conviction for resisting with violence under Fla. Stat. § 843.01, is a “violent felony” under the ACCA’s elements clause, where: (a) the statute only requires any “unlawful” force, which can be completed by the same mere touch found not to qualify as a “violent felony” in Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133, 140 (2010); and (b) there is no mens rea requirement as to the “doing violence” element of the offense, see Leocal v. Ashcroft, 543 U.S. 1, 9 (2004) (stating that the “use” of physical force suggests a higher degree of intent than negligent or accidental conduct). i