Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s second section 2255 habeas petition challenging his 200-month term of incarceration, even though: (1) said sentence was based on Dist. Ct.’s finding that defendant had qualified for armed career criminal status due, in part, to defendant’s prior Illinois burglary conviction; and (2) Haney, 840 F.3d 472, found that Illinois burglary conviction did not satisfy definition of “violent felony” for purposes of treatment as armed career criminal. While defendant had raised viable legal argument, he could not obtain any relief under instant successive habeas petition, since defendant raised only statutory, rather than constitutional argument, which did not rest on Johnson, 135 S.Ct. 2551, or any other retroactive rule of constitutional law. Ct., though, raised potential of defendant obtaining relief under section 2241 petition filed in jurisdiction where he is currently confined.
Federal 7th Circuit Court
Criminal Court
Sentencing