Maurice Daniels v. USA, No. 16-16338 (11th Cir. 2017)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 16-16338 Date Filed: 10/27/2017 Page: 1 of 2 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 16-16338 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket Nos. 1:16-cv-22666-CMA, 1:10-cr-20277-CMA-1 MAURICE DANIELS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (October 27, 2017) Before TJOFLAT, WILLIAM PRYOR and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Maurice Daniels appeals the denial of his motion to vacate. 28 U.S.C. § 2255. We issued a certificate of appealability to address whether Daniels is Case: 16-16338 Date Filed: 10/27/2017 Page: 2 of 2 entitled to relief from his firearm convictions on the ground that Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), invalidated the “risk of force” clause in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B). We affirm the denial of Daniels’s motion. Daniels’s argument is foreclosed by our recent decision in Ovalles v. United States, 861 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2017). In Ovalles, we held “that Johnson’s voidfor-vagueness ruling does not apply to or invalidate the ‘risk-of-force’ clause in § 924(c)(3)(B).” Id. at 1265. Because section 924(c)(3)(B) is not unconstitutionally vague, Daniels is not entitled to relief from his convictions. We AFFIRM the denial of Daniels’s motion to vacate. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
