No. 19-6357
James Alton Turner, Jr. v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: 28-usc-2255 acca-interpretation criminal-procedure due-process,criminal-procedure,sentencing,acca,joh elements-clause habeas-relief johnson-retroactivity johnson-v-united-states residual-clause sentencing-court sentencing-guidelines violent-felonies
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus
HabeasCorpus
Latest Conference:
2019-11-22
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 petitioner must affirmatively prove the sentencing court relied on the residual clause
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, 135 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 elements clause to determine that a defendant’s prior convictions qualified as violent felonies.
Docket Entries
2019-11-25
Petition DENIED.
2019-11-07
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 11/22/2019.
2019-10-31
Waiver of right of respondent United States of America to respond filed.
2019-10-21
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due November 22, 2019)
Attorneys
James Turner, Jr.
United States of America
Noel J. Francisco — Solicitor General, Respondent