Cooper v. USA - 2255

Filing 2

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge James K. Bredar on 12/14/2017. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND
CURTIS COOPER,

*

Movant

*

v,

*

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

*

Respondent

*

*

CRIMINAL NO, .JKB-IO-0299
CIVIL NO, JKB-16-1606

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

*

MEMORANDUM
Pending befiJre the Court is Curtis Cooper's motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.c.

S 2255.

(Crim. No. 10-0299. ECF No. 44.) The motion is premised upon the Supreme Court's

ruling in .Iohllsoll

I'.

Ullited Slates. 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). which held that the residual clause of

the Armed Career Criminal Act C'ACCA")

was void for vagueness.

lei. at 894. Movant asserts

an entitlement to rclief because the sentencing court determined Movant was a career offender
under the advisory sentencing
provision

with wording

unconstitutionally

guidelines and those guidelines included a career offender

identical

to the ACCA

provision

struck down in Johnson

as

vague. The Supreme Court's more recent decision in Beckles \'. Uniled Slales,

137 S. Ct. 886 (2017). held that the sentencing guidelines may not be challenged as void for
vagueness.

lei. at 894. Accordingly. the instant motion is without merit and will be denied by

separate order.
A certilicate of appealability

may issue only if the movant has made a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.

28 U.S.c.

ivlcDaniel. 529 U.S. 473. 484 (2000). In order to satisfy

S

2253(c)(2).

S 2253(c).

See also Slack ".

a movant must demonstrate

that reasonable jurists would lind the district court's assessment of the constitutional elaims
debatable or wrong. Miller-EI \'. Cockrell. 537 U.S. 322. 336-38 (2003) (citing Slack. 529 U.S.

at 484). Cooper has failed to make such a showing, and the Court declines to issue a certificate
of appealability.

DATED this

It

day of December, 2017.

BY THE COURT:

Q~ -1,(.3~
..
James K. Bredar
.Chief Judge

2