Does an unconditional guilty plea waive a defendant's right to challenge his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) on the grounds that Davis rendered it unconstitutional?

QUESTION PRESENTED In 2018, this Court held that an unconditional guilty plea does not prevent a criminal defendant from challenging the constitutionality of their conviction. Class v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 798 (2018). In 2019, it held that part of the definition of “crime of violence” was unconstitutionally vague and, therefore, void. United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). Davis narrowed the scope of predicate offenses upon that can support a conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). As a new constitutional rule that changes the substantive reach of law, Davis applies retroactively to cases on collateral review. See, e.g., Welch v. United States, 136 8. Ct. 1257 (2016). Zenon Grzegorczyk pleaded guilty to violating § 924(c) in 2014, well before Davis was decided. Nevertheless, the Seventh Circuit held that he could not challenge the constitutionality of his conviction on collateral attack because he had waived any such challenge through his unconditional guilty plea. The question presented is: Pursuant to this Court’s holding in Class, does an unconditional guilty plea, by itself, waive a defendant’s right to challenge his conviction under § 924(c) on the grounds that Davis rendered it unconstitutional?