Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

James Villa v. United States, 16-4063 (2017)

Court: Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit Number: 16-4063 Visitors: 44
Filed: Nov. 14, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit _ No. 16-4063 _ James Villa, lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant, v. United States of America, lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee. _ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Omaha _ Submitted: November 1, 2017 Filed: November 14, 2017 [Unpublished] _ Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. In 2013, James Villa pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute marijuana
More
                  United States Court of Appeals
                             For the Eighth Circuit
                         ___________________________

                                 No. 16-4063
                         ___________________________

                                      James Villa,

                        lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant,

                                            v.

                              United States of America,

                       lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee.
                                       ____________

                     Appeal from United States District Court
                       for the District of Nebraska - Omaha
                                  ____________

                            Submitted: November 1, 2017
                             Filed: November 14, 2017
                                   [Unpublished]
                                   ____________

Before COLLOTON, BOWMAN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
                        ____________

PER CURIAM.

       In 2013, James Villa pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute
marijuana and he was sentenced as a career offender to 164 months in prison. In
2015, Villa filed this 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, claiming that his sentence violated his
rights under the Due Process Clause because he no longer qualified as a career
offender after Johnson v. United States, 
135 S. Ct. 2551
(2015). Johnson held that
the “residual clause” of the Armed Career Criminal Act was unconstitutionally vague.
Villa argued by extension that an identically-worded provision of the Sentencing
Guidelines applied in his case, USSG § 4B1.2(a)(2) (2013), was also
unconstitutionally vague. The district court1 denied relief, and Villa appeals.

      Assuming without deciding that Villa’s claim was not waived in his plea
agreement, Villa is not entitled to relief under § 2255 because the advisory Guidelines
are not subject to a vagueness challenge under the Due Process Clause. Beckles v.
United States, 
137 S. Ct. 886
, 895 (2017).

      The judgment is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.
                     ______________________________




      1
      The Honorable John M. Gerrard, United States District Judge for the District
of Nebraska.

                                         -2-

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer