Hines v. United States, 1:16cv511-MHT. (2019)
Court: District Court, M.D. Alabama
Number: infdco20191003a12
Visitors: 10
Filed: Sep. 30, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 30, 2019
Summary: OPINION MYRON H. THOMPSON , District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255, petitioner Max Otis Hines filed this lawsuit seeking habeas relief as to his conviction and sentence for discharging a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c). The parties agree, and the court finds, that the habeas petition should be granted as to Hines's 924(c) conviction and sentence, first, based on the United States Supreme Court's holding in United States v. Davis, 139 S.Ct. 2
Summary: OPINION MYRON H. THOMPSON , District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255, petitioner Max Otis Hines filed this lawsuit seeking habeas relief as to his conviction and sentence for discharging a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c). The parties agree, and the court finds, that the habeas petition should be granted as to Hines's 924(c) conviction and sentence, first, based on the United States Supreme Court's holding in United States v. Davis, 139 S.Ct. 23..
More
OPINION
MYRON H. THOMPSON, District Judge.
Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, petitioner Max Otis Hines filed this lawsuit seeking habeas relief as to his conviction and sentence for discharging a firearm during a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). The parties agree, and the court finds, that the habeas petition should be granted as to Hines's § 924(c) conviction and sentence, first, based on the United States Supreme Court's holding in United States v. Davis, 139 S.Ct. 2319 (2019) that the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3) is unconstitutionally vague; and second, because petitioner's underlying conviction of kidnapping in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1201(a) does not qualify as a "crime of violence" under the elements clause of § 924(a)(3), see United States v. Lewis, 115 F.3d 1531, 1535 (11th Cir. 1997); United States v. Gillis, ___ F.3d ___, 2019 WL 4383203 (11th Cir. Sept. 19, 2019). An appropriate judgment will be entered.
Source: Leagle
