In Re: Sheldon Dean Christopher Watt, No. 16-14675 (11th Cir. 2016)Annotate this Case
Petitioner filed an application seeking an order authorizing the district court to consider a second or successive motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his federal sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255(h) and 2244(b)(3)(A). Petitioner argued that Johnson v. United States invalidates his conviction for knowingly using a firearm in furtherance of an assault with intent to rob a postal employee, 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1)(A). The court concluded, however, that Johnson invalidated the residual clause of section 924(e), but the decision did not address the validity of the definition of a crime of violence found in section 924(c). Nor has the court held that Johnson affects section 924(c)(3)(B). Even if the court were to extrapolate from Johnson that section 924(c)(3)(B) is also unconstitutional, it would not help petitioner because his conviction would be valid even if Johnson renders the definition of “crime of violence” in section 924(c)(3)(B) unconstitutional. Accordingly, the court denied the application because petitioner has failed to make a prima facie showing that he is entitled to relief.