Cooper v. USA - 2255, No. 1:2016cv01606 - Document 2 (D. Md. 2017)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Chief Judge James K. Bredar on 12/14/2017. (kw2s, Deputy Clerk)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Cooper v. USA - 2255 Doc. 2 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND CURTIS COOPER, * Movant * v, * UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, * Respondent * * CRIMINAL NO, .JKB-IO-0299 CIVIL NO, JKB-16-1606 * * * * * * * * * * * MEMORANDUM Pending befiJre the Court is Curtis Cooper's motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.c. S 2255. (Crim. No. 10-0299. ECF No. 44.) The motion is premised upon the Supreme Court's ruling in .Iohllsoll I'. Ullited Slates. 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). which held that the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act C'ACCA") was void for vagueness. lei. at 894. Movant asserts an entitlement to rclief because the sentencing court determined Movant was a career offender under the advisory sentencing provision with wording unconstitutionally guidelines and those guidelines included a career offender identical to the ACCA provision struck down in Johnson as vague. The Supreme Court's more recent decision in Beckles \'. Uniled Slales, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017). held that the sentencing guidelines may not be challenged as void for vagueness. lei. at 894. Accordingly. the instant motion is without merit and will be denied by separate order. A certilicate of appealability may issue only if the movant has made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. 28 U.S.c. ivlcDaniel. 529 U.S. 473. 484 (2000). In order to satisfy S 2253(c)(2). S 2253(c). See also Slack ". a movant must demonstrate that reasonable jurists would lind the district court's assessment of the constitutional elaims debatable or wrong. Miller-EI \'. Cockrell. 537 U.S. 322. 336-38 (2003) (citing Slack. 529 U.S. Dockets.Justia.com at 484). Cooper has failed to make such a showing, and the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. DATED this It day of December, 2017. BY THE COURT: Q~ -1,(.3~ .. James K. Bredar .Chief Judge 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.
