Oaks v. USA
Filing
6
ORDER granting 5 Motion to Stay to place this case in abeyance, and this matter is hereby held in abeyance pending Supreme Court's decision in Beckles. Thereafter, Govt shall have 60 days from date Supreme Court decides Beckles within which to file its response in this matter. Signed by District Judge Martin Reidinger on 9/15/16. (ejb)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
ASHEVILLE DIVISION
CIVIL CASE NO. 1:16-cv-00151-MR
CRIMINAL CASE NO. 1:02-cr-00089-MR-1
GREGORY ALLEN OAKS,
)
)
Petitioner,
)
)
vs.
)
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
Respondent.
)
________________________________ )
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the motion of the United States
requesting that the Court enter an order holding this action in abeyance. [CV
Doc. 5].1 According to the government’s motion, defense counsel does not
object to its request. [Id.].
Petitioner was convicted of possession with intent to distribute cocaine,
in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), use and carry a firearm during and in
relation to a drug-trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), and
possession of a firearm by a felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). [CR
1
Citations to the record herein contain the relevant document number referenced
preceded by either the letters “CV” denoting the document is listed on the docket in the
civil case file number 1:16-cv-00151-MR, or the letters “CR” denoting the document is
listed on the docket in the criminal case file number 1:02-cr-00089-MR-1.
Doc. 67]. The presentence report noted that Petitioner had at least two prior
qualifying convictions – including Tennessee convictions for aggravated
assault, aggravated robbery, misdemeanor assault and battery, and felony
escape, and a North Carolina conviction for assault with a deadly weapon
inflicting serious injury -- that triggered both the Career Offender
enhancement under § 4B1.2 of the Sentencing Guidelines and the Armed
Career Criminal enhancement pursuant to § 4B1.4. The Court sentenced
Petitioner as an Armed Career Criminal to a total term of 384 months’
imprisonment. [Id.].
On June 6, 2016, Petitioner commenced this action by filing a petition
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. [CV Doc. 1]. In his petition, Petitioner
contends that, in light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015),
his prior Tennessee convictions for aggravated assault, aggravated robbery,
misdemeanor assault and battery, and felony escape, and his prior North
Carolina conviction for assault with a deadly weapon inflicting serious injury
no longer qualify as “crimes of violence” under the Guidelines. [Id. at 6].
Consequently, Petitioner argues his designation as an Armed Career
Criminal and/or Career Offender is improper and, thus, his sentence is
unlawful. [Id.].
2
In response to the petition, the government has filed a motion to hold
this proceeding in abeyance. [CV Doc. 5]. The government notes that this
case will be affected by the Supreme Court’s decision next Term in Beckles
v. United States, 616 Fed. Appx. 415 (11th Cir.), cert. granted, 2016 WL
1029080 (U.S. June 27, 2016) (No. 15-8544). [Id. at 2]. One of the questions
presented in Beckles is whether Johnson applies retroactively to cases
collaterally challenging federal sentences enhanced under the residual
clause in U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2). The residual clause invalidated in Johnson
is identical to the residual clause in the Career Offender provision of the
Guidelines, § 4B1.2(a)(2) (defining "crime of violence").
Based upon the reasons given by the government, and without
objection by Petitioner, the Court concludes that the government’s motion
should be granted.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the government’s motion to place
this case in abeyance [CV Doc. 5], is hereby GRANTED and this matter is
hereby held in abeyance pending the Supreme Court’s decision in Beckles.
Thereafter, the government shall have 60 days from the date the Supreme
Court decides Beckles within which to file its response in this matter.
3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: September 15, 2016
4
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?