Chazen v. Marske

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendant’s section 2241 petition that challenged his 15-year mandatory minimum sentence on unlawful possession of firearm charge, where said sentence was based on sentencing court’s finding that defendant qualified for said sentence under Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) based, in part, on defendant’s two prior Minnesota burglary convictions, and where instant Dist. Ct. could properly find under Van Cannon, 890 F.3d 656, that said convictions no longer qualified as “serious felonies” under ACCA. Also, defendant could pursue relief under section 2241, even though he did not prevail on this issue in prior habeas petition, because: (1) at time of his original habeas petition, relevant precedent foreclosed any contention that defendant’s prior Minnesota burglary convictions did not qualify as violent felonies for purposes of ACCA; and (2) under Mathis, 136 S.Ct. 2243, defendant could proceed under section 2241, where said case was decided after resolution of defendant’s original habeas petition, and where Mathis opened door to defendant’s previously foreclosed claim.