Harrison v. USA
Filing
6
MEMORANDUM OPINION regarding petitioner's motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence. Signed by Judge Marcia A. Crone on 8/16/2016. (bjc, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MICHAEL RAY HARRISON,
Plaintiff,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:16-CV-228
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Movant Michael Ray Harrison, proceeding through counsel, filed a motion to vacate, set
aside or correct sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
Factual Background
On December 1, 2005, a jury found movant guilty of being a felon in possession of a
firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The Presentence Investigation Report (PSR)
revealed that movant had three prior felony convictions–one for bank robbery, one for aggravated
assault of a peace officer, and the third for aggravated assault. Due to the prior convictions,
movant’s sentence exposure was increased from a maximum of 10 years of imprisonment to a
minimum sentence of 15 years of imprisonment under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).
On June 28, 2006, the Court sentenced movant to 327 months of imprisonment. The judgment
was affirmed on appeal.
Movant filed a motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence on September 9, 2008. The
motion was denied, and movant was denied a certificate of appealability. On June 13, 2016, the
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit authorized movant to file a second or
successive motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence.
Discussion
The Armed Career Criminal Act provides that a person who violates § 922(g) is subject
to a mandatory minimum sentence of 15 years of imprisonment if he has three or more prior
convictions for a violent felony or a serious drug offense. A “violent felony” is defined as any
crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year that: (i) has as an element the
use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another; or (ii) is
burglary, arson, or extortion, involves the use of explosives, “or otherwise involves conduct that
presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.” 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B). The
quoted language is referred to as the “residual clause” of the ACCA.
In 2015, the United States Supreme Court held that the residual clause of § 924(e) was
unconstitutionally vague. Johnson v. United States,
U.S.
, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). The
Supreme Court recently held that Johnson applies retroactively to cases on collateral review.
Welch v. United States,
U.S.
, 136 S. Ct. 1257, 1260-68 (2016).
Movant asserts, and the government agrees, that movant’s conviction for aggravated assault
of a peace officer no longer qualifies as a violent felony in light of Johnson. The government
does not oppose granting movant relief and agrees that movant should be resentenced.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, this motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence is
.
meritorious. A final judgment will be entered granting the motion and vacating the sentence.
SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 7th day of September, 2004.
SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 16th day of August, 2016.
________________________________________
MARCIA A. CRONE
2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?