Whether the Court should resolve the three-way circuit split regarding whether, and under what circumstances, a movant's procedural default may be excused because his constitutional vagueness challenge was 'not reasonably available' prior to Johnson v. United States

QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. Whether the Court should resolve the three-way circuit split regarding whether, and under what circumstances, a movant’s procedural default may be excused because his constitutional vagueness challenge was “not reasonably available” prior to Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (2015). 2. Whether a general verdict that was obtained in reliance on the unconstitutionally vague residual clause in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B), may be sustained based on the reviewing court’s finding that the jury also relied on a valid basis to convict. i INTERESTED PARTIES Pursuant to Sup. Ct. R. 14.1(b)(@), Mr. Granda submits that there are no