DENNY CHIN, Chief District Judge.

With the consent of the government, Giovanni Castellanos moves, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, to vacate his Count Two conviction and 60-month consecutive sentence for using a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence (namely, conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery).

Castellanos pleaded guilty to a two-count superseding information charging him with: (1) conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951; and (2) using a firearm during and in relation to that conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). Cr. Dkt. No. 77. This Court sentenced Castellanos to 240 months on the Hobbs Act conspiracy count, and a consecutive term of 60 months on the § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) firearm count, for a total of 300 months. Cr. Dkt. No. 97. Castellanos did not appeal, and this Court denied his initial § 2255 motion. Cr. Dkt. No. 102.

In 2016, within one year of Johnson v. United States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015)—which struck as void for vagueness the residual clause of ACCA's definition of "violent felony," 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii)— Castellanos, pro se, applied for authorization from the Second Circuit, pursuant to § 2255(h)(2), to file a successive § 2255 motion.1 While that application was pending, the Supreme Court held that § 924(c)(3)(B)'s residual clause is void for vagueness, in violation of the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause. United States v. Davis, 139 S.Ct. 2319, 2336 (2019). Then, in light of Davis, the Second Circuit held that conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery is no longer a valid § 924(c) predicate, and vacated a § 924(c) conviction based on that predicate. United States v. Barrett, 937 F.3d 126, 127 (2d Cir. 2019).

Following Davis and Barrett, the Second Circuit granted Castellanos authorization to proceed on the claim that his § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) conviction—also predicated on conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery—was invalid. Order, Castellanos v. United States, No. 16-1698 (2d Cir. Oct. 29, 2019), Dkt. No. 60, attached as Exh. A.2

This case is directly controlled by Davis and Barrett. The predicate crime of violence for Castellanos's § 924(c)(1)(A)(i) conviction was conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery. But "the identification of that crime as one of violence depends on the § 924(c)(3)(B) residual clause definition, which Davis has now pronounced unconstitutionally vague." Barrett, 937 F.3d at 128.

Accordingly, the parties agree that this Court should grant Castellanos's motion, vacate his Count Two conviction and consecutive 60-month sentence, and enter an amended judgment reflecting only a conviction on Count One, and a 240-month sentence.

MOTION GRANTED. The conviction on Count Two is VACATED, as is the 60-month consecutive sentences imposed on Count Two. The Court will enter an amended judgment reflecting only a conviction on Count One and a 240-month sentence.

SO ORDERED.