Mays v. USA
Filing
12
ORDER ADOPTING 10 Report and Recommendation and DENYING Mays' Amended Motion to Vacate (Doc. 5 ). It is further ORDERED DENYING a certificate of appealability under Rule 11, Rules Governing §2255 Proceedings, for the reason that Mays has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c). Signed by Senior Judge Frederick J Martone on 04/19/2017. (KAS)
1
WO
2
3
4
5
6
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
7
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
8
9
Robert Lee Mays,
Petitioner,
10
11
ORDER
v.
12
No. CV-16-00501-PHX-FJM
CR-08-01218-1-PHX-FJM
USA,
13
Respondent.
14
15
16
The court has before it Mays' Amended Motion to Vacate under 28 U.S.C. §2255
17
(Doc. 5), the government's Response (Doc. 7), Mays' Reply (Doc. 9), the Report and
18
Recommendation (Doc. 10), and Mays' Objection to the Report and Recommendation
19
20
21
22
23
(Doc. 11).
Mays contends that each of his robbery convictions cannot count under 18 U.S.C.
§924(e) because robbery is not a "violent felony" within the meaning of that section.
Relying on Johnson v. United States, 130 S.Ct. 1265 (2010), he contends that the use or
24
25
26
27
28
threatened use of physical force required under Arizona law is insufficient to constitute
the use or threatened use of "violent force--that is capable of causing physical pain or
injury to another person." Id. at 1271.
1
2
Relying on State v. Bishop, 144 Ariz. 521, 698 P.2d 1240 (1985), the magistrate
judge concluded that force "of such a nature as to show that it was intended to overpower
3
4
5
6
the party robbed," Id. at 524, under Arizona law, is sufficient to cause physical pain or
injury to another person within the meaning of Johnson. Report and Recommendation at
10 (Doc. 10). Therefore, the magistrate judge concluded that at least four of Mays' prior
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
convictions for robbery offenses satisfied 18 U.S.C. §924(e).
Mays disagrees, but fails to demonstrate how threatening to use force sufficient to
overpower the party robbed could possibly be insufficient to cause physical pain or injury
to another. We therefore overrule the Objections, and accept the magistrate judge's
recommended disposition (Doc. 10).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED DENYING Mays' Amended Motion to Vacate
(Doc. 5).
It is further ORDERED DENYING a certificate of appealability under Rule 11,
17
Rules Governing §2255 Proceedings, for the reason that Mays has not made a substantial
18
showing of the denial of a constitutional right under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c).
19
Dated this 19th day of April, 2017.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-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?