Sykes v. United States of America (INMATE 3), No. 2:2016cv00473 - Document 11 (M.D. Ala. 2016)

Court Description: OPINION. The parties agree that Sykes is entitled to relief under Johnson and Welch. See Joint Proposal for Proceeding On § 2255 Motion (doc. no. 7 ). Accordingly, the court will grant his petition, vacate his sentence, and resentence him. An appropriate judgment will be entered. Signed by Honorable Judge Myron H. Thompson on 7/15/2016. (dmn, )

Download PDF
Sykes v. United States of America (INMATE 3) Doc. 11 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, NORTHERN DIVISION PAYTON LEE SYKES, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:16cv473-MHT (WO) OPINION Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, petitioner Payton Lee Sykes, a federal prisoner, filed this lawsuit seeking habeas relief. Specifically, he seeks to vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence this court imposed upon him pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Career Criminal Act (ACCA). § 924(e)(1) of the Armed He relies on the Supreme Court's decisions in Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. ___, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), that the residual clause of § 924(e) is unconstitutionally vague, and Welch v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 136 S. Ct. 1257 (2016), Dockets.Justia.com that the Johnson decision is retroactive on collateral review. Sykes was convicted of one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He was then sentenced to 180 months of imprisonment pursuant to § 924(e)(1) based in part on prior convictions for third-degree burglary. The parties agree that Sykes is entitled to relief under Johnson and Welch. See Joint Proposal for Proceeding On § 2255 Motion (doc. no. 7). Accordingly, the court will grant his petition, vacate his sentence, and resentence him. An appropriate judgment will be entered. DONE, this the 15th day of July, 2016. /s/ Myron H. Thompson UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

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.