Brye v. Haynes, 2:12-cv-00144

Brye was convicted in the Middle District of Florida of felon in possession and ACCA-enhanced offenses; sentenced to 265 months; affirmed on appeal.
Brye filed a §2255 motion alleging ineffective assistance for not objecting to a jury-trial-based sentencing argument; the district court dismissed for lack of prejudice.
Brye then filed a §2241 petition asserting actual innocence of the §924(e) enhancement and challenging the ACCA under Begay and Archer.
Respondent concedes Brye is entitled to relief under the savings clause and should be transferred for resentencing; procedural-default defenses are waived.
The court discusses whether Begay/Archer apply retroactively on collateral review and whether the savings clause permits sentencing claims when within the statutory maximum.
The magistrate judge recommends granting §2241 relief and transferring Brye for resentencing in the Middle District of Florida.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May Brye obtain §2241 relief under the savings clause?	Brye argues §2255 is inadequate/ineffective; savings clause permits collateral relief.	Respondent concedes savings clause applies due to sentencing defect.	Yes; Brye is entitled to relief under the savings clause.
Are Brye’s ACCA enhancements barred by Begay/Archer retroactively on collateral review?	Begay and Archer support treating two Florida concealed-weapons convictions as non-violent felonies for ACCA purposes.	Circuit law forecloses retroactive application to §2255 motions, or treats such claims as non-cognizable collateral issues.	Brye's §2241 relief is warranted because Begay/Archer undermine the ACCA designation for his prior felonies.
Did Brye suffer a complete miscarriage of justice requiring resentencing?	Counseling error and misapplication of ACCA constituted a fundamental sentencing defect.	Not explicitly argued; focus is on retroactivity and eligibility for relief.	Yes; relief is appropriate to correct a sentencing error under the savings clause.

Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (U.S. 2008) (defines violent felony for ACCA by generic interpretation)
Archer v. United States, 531 F.3d 1347 (11th Cir. 2008) (application of Begay to guideline/ACCA analysis)
Wofford v. Scott, 177 F.3d 1236 (11th Cir. 1999) (savings clause and §2255(e) framework for §2241 relief)
Gilbert v. United States, 640 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2011) (savings clause does not permit collateral review of sentencing claims within statutory maximum)
Lynn v. United States, 365 F.3d 1225 (11th Cir. 2004) (non-constitutional errors on direct appeal generally cannot be raised in §2255)