Heavner v. USA
ORDER. Respondent's Request to Lift Stay and Deny Pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion on the Merits is granted (Doc. #12); Petitioner's Motion to Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. #1) is denied; and the Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability as to John L Heavner (1). (Related Criminal Case 05-00399-01-CR-W-ODS.) Signed on 5/2/17 by District Judge Ortrie D. Smith. (Matthes Mitra, Renea)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
JOHN L. HEAVNER,
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Case No. 16-00567-CV-W-ODS
Crim. No. 05-00399-01-CR-W-ODS
Pending are Petitioner’s Motion to Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §
2255 (Doc. #1), and Respondent’s Opposition to Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and
Request to Lift Stay (Doc. #12). Petitioner has not responded to Respondent’s filing,
and the time for doing so has passed.
Petitioner argues his sentence should be corrected because he was denied due
process when he was sentenced pursuant to the Court’s finding that he was a career
offender under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Petitioner argues the
Supreme Court’s ruling in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), wherein
the Supreme Court held the residual clause of the Armed Criminal Career Act (“ACCA”)
was unconstitutionally vague, should apply to the career offender provision in the
Sentencing Guidelines. Petitioner requested and was granted a stay pending the
Supreme Court’s decision in Beckles v. United States. Docs. #6, 9.
On March 6, 2017, the Supreme Court found “the Sentencing Guidelines are not
subject to a vagueness challenge under the Due Process Clause and that § 4B1.2(a)’s
residual clause is not void for vagueness.” Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886,
895 (2017). Now that Beckles has been decided, the stay in this matter is lifted.
Pursuant to Beckles, Respondent asks the Court to deny Petitioner’s motion to
vacate his sentence. The sole argument in Petitioner’s motion to vacate his sentence is
rendered meritless due to Beckles. Petitioner so admitted in his motion to stay. Doc.
#6, at 2 (stating “[i]f Beckles holds that Johnson is not retroactively applicable to
guidelines cases on collateral review, movant’s case would necessarily be terminated.”).
Pursuant to Beckles, Petitioner’s motion to vacate his sentence is denied. Because
Petitioner made no substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, the Court
will not issue a certificate of appealability.
Based upon the foregoing, the following is ordered:
Respondent’s Request to Lift Stay and Deny Pending 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Motion on the Merits is granted (Doc. #12);
Petitioner’s Motion to Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255
(Doc. #1) is denied;
and the Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/ Ortrie D. Smith
ORTRIE D. SMITH, SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DATE: May 2, 2017
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?