Filed: Oct. 19, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-2150 _ Charles J. Weber lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant v. United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: October 12, 2017 Filed: October 19, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal prisoner Charles Weber, who pleaded guilty to being a felon
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-2150 _ Charles J. Weber lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant v. United States of America lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee _ Appeal from United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City _ Submitted: October 12, 2017 Filed: October 19, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Federal prisoner Charles Weber, who pleaded guilty to being a felon i..
More
United States Court of Appeals
For the Eighth Circuit
___________________________
No. 16-2150
___________________________
Charles J. Weber
lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant
v.
United States of America
lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee
____________
Appeal from United States District Court
for the Western District of Missouri - Kansas City
____________
Submitted: October 12, 2017
Filed: October 19, 2017
[Unpublished]
____________
Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
____________
PER CURIAM.
Federal prisoner Charles Weber, who pleaded guilty to being a felon in
possession of a firearm, appeals from the order of the District Court1 denying his 28
1
The Honorable Dean Whipple, United States District Judge for the Western
District of Missouri.
U.S.C. § 2255 motion that challenged his sentence under Johnson v. United States,
135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (invalidating the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal
Act as unconstitutionally vague). Specifically, Weber challenged his increased
offense level under United States Sentencing Guidelines § 2K2.1. After de novo
review, we conclude that the District Court properly denied relief because Weber’s
sentence was calculated under the advisory Guidelines, which are not subject to void-
for-vagueness challenges. See Beckles v. United States,
137 S. Ct. 886, 895 (2017).
Accordingly, we affirm, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.
______________________________
-2-