U.S. v. Martinez-Vasquez, 14CR1905-JLS (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180820a87
Visitors: 14
Filed: Aug. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 17, 2018
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2255 and DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY JANIS L. SAMMARTINO , District Judge . Presently before the Court is Defendant's request for relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (ECF No. 24). Defendant contends that the 8-level enhancement 1 imposed upon him at sentencing is impermissible in light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015). The United States Supreme Court has held, however, that Johnson does not apply to the advisory
Summary: ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. 2255 and DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY JANIS L. SAMMARTINO , District Judge . Presently before the Court is Defendant's request for relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (ECF No. 24). Defendant contends that the 8-level enhancement 1 imposed upon him at sentencing is impermissible in light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015). The United States Supreme Court has held, however, that Johnson does not apply to the advisory F..
More
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY
JANIS L. SAMMARTINO, District Judge.
Presently before the Court is Defendant's request for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (ECF No. 24). Defendant contends that the 8-level enhancement1 imposed upon him at sentencing is impermissible in light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015). The United States Supreme Court has held, however, that Johnson does not apply to the advisory Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Beckles v. United States, 137 S.Ct. 886 (2017). Therefore, Defendant presents no valid basis to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence.
Accordingly, Defendant's motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED. Additionally, the Court DENIES Defendant a certificate of appealability, as Defendant has not made a substantial showing that he has been denied a constitutional right. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (providing that a certificate shall issue "only if the applicant has made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right").
IT IS SO ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. The Court actually imposed a 16-level enhancement pursuant to United States Sentencing Guideline § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii), but this distinction does not alter the Court's necessary conclusion.
Source: Leagle
