Bridges v. U.S.

Dist. Ct. erred in denying without holding evidentiary hearing defendant's habeas petition that challenged his 140-month sentence on his Hobb's Act robbery convictions that was based, in part, on imposition of career offender enhancement under section 4B1.1 of USSG, where defendant alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective for stipulating that defendant's Hobb's Act robbery convictions qualified as "crimes of violence" for purposes of imposing said enhancement. At time of entry of 2018 guilty plea, there was no binding precedent in instant circuit as to whether Hobb's Act offense qualified as crime of violence for purposes of career offender enhancement, and Dist. Ct. denied habeas petition based on belief that defendant's trial counsel's failure to anticipate argument that had not yet been accepted could not be deemed constitutionally deficient. However, Ct. of Appeals noted that at time of entry of instant guilty plea, 10^th Circuit Court of Appeals had found that Hobb's Act offense did not qualify as crime of violence under 2016 amendment to guideline definition of crime of violence. Moreover, Ct. found that trial counsel's apparent failure to investigate or raise challenge to career offender enhancement could be deemed deficient performance, where case law sufficiently foreshadowed instant enhancement issue. As such, defendant was entitled to evidentiary hearing to explore trial counsel explanation regarding basis of his representation of defendant and/or his failure to raise enhancement issue. Ct. also joined other circuits to find that Hobb's Act robbery offense is not crime of violence for purposes of career offender enhancement.