Whether a postconviction motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, challenging a sentence imposed under the pre-2005 mandatory version of the Sentencing Guidelines and based on the so-called 'residual clause' of the career-offender provision of the Guidelines, is timely when filed within one year of this Court's ruling in Johnson v. United States

QUESTION PRESENTED Whether a postconviction motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, challenging a sentence imposed under the pre-2005 mandatory version of the Sentencing Guidelines and based on the so-called “residual clause” of the career-offender provision of the Guidelines, U.S. SENT’G GUIDELINES MANUEL § 4B1.2(a)(2) (U.S. SENT’G COMW’N 1999), is timely when filed within one year of this Court’s ruling in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), which held for the first time that the identically worded “residual clause” of the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924, is unconstitutionally vague and that defendants cannot be subjected to sentence based on it. i