Maurice Daniels v. USA


Opinion issued by court as to Appellant Maurice Daniels. Decision: Affirmed. Opinion type: Non-Published. Opinion method: Per Curiam. The opinion is also available through the Court's Opinions page at this link

Download PDF
Case: 16-16338 Date Filed: 10/27/2017 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 16-16338 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket Nos. 1:16-cv-22666-CMA, 1:10-cr-20277-CMA-1 MAURICE DANIELS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (October 27, 2017) Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Maurice Daniels appeals the denial of his motion to vacate. 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We issued a certificate of appealability to address whether Daniels is Case: 16-16338 Date Filed: 10/27/2017 Page: 2 of 2 entitled to relief from his firearm convictions on the ground that Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), invalidated the “risk of force” clause in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B). We affirm the denial of Daniels’s motion. Daniels’s argument is foreclosed by our recent decision in Ovalles v. United States, 861 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2017). In Ovalles, we held “that Johnson’s voidfor-vagueness ruling does not apply to or invalidate the ‘risk-of-force’ clause in § 924(c)(3)(B).” Id. at 1265. Because section 924(c)(3)(B) is not unconstitutionally vague, Daniels is not entitled to relief from his convictions. We AFFIRM the denial of Daniels’s motion to vacate. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?