Whether the Ninth Circuit violated the petitioner's due process rights by misapplying the categorical analysis and relying on a non-retroactive state court interpretation of the state statute

Question Presented for Review L. When receiving a reduced sentence in 2020 for a crack-cocaine offense under the First Step Act, Petitioner Mitchell asked the district court to find he was no longer a career offender. The district court rejected the argument and applied the career offender enhancement, which tripled the guideline range. Mr. Mitchell had been previously convicted of a state offense in 1999, under Nevada Revised Statute (N.R.S.) § 453.337, at which time the statute’s divisibility was ambiguous. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the sentence by relying on a state court opinion issued after Mr. Mitchell’s resentencing—a non-retroactive Nevada Supreme Court opinion that impermissibly addressed federal categorical divisibility analysis. Mr. Mitchell asks this Court to review whether the Panel violated Mr. Mitchell’s due process rights by: (1) misapplying the categorical analysis required to assess a state statute’s divisibility; and (2) improperly relying on a non-retroactive, new state judicial interpretation of the state statute? ii