Grzegorczyk v. United States, 142 S.Ct. 2580

Background

Petitioner Zenon Grzegorczyk hired and paid undercover officers to kill six people and pleaded guilty to (1) using an interstate facility to facilitate a murder (18 U.S.C. §1958) and (2) possessing a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. §924(c)); his plea was unconditional and included a waiver of certain collateral and appellate rights.
The district court sentenced him to ~17 years, including a 5-year §924(c) term and a 12-year-plus term for §1958; the parties mistakenly believed §1958 carried a 20-year statutory maximum.
After this Court decided that the residual clause in related statutes was unconstitutionally vague, Grzegorczyk moved under 28 U.S.C. §2255 to vacate his §924(c) conviction; while Davis and related developments undermined the residual-clause basis for §924(c), the district court and Seventh Circuit denied relief based on Grzegorczyk’s waiver.
The Solicitor General later concluded §1958 is not a “crime of violence” under the elements clause and asked this Court to GVR (grant, vacate, remand) so the lower court could revisit sentencing with the Government waiving procedural defenses.
The Supreme Court denied certiorari. Justice Kavanaugh (joined by four Justices) issued a statement declining to vacate the Seventh Circuit judgment and noting executive clemency/pardon as an available (nonjudicial) remedy; Justice Sotomayor (joined by three Justices) dissented, arguing a GVR was appropriate and denial leaves Grzegorczyk with several years of unlawful incarceration.

Issues

Issue	Grzegorczyk's Argument	United States' Argument	Held
Whether to GVR (grant, vacate, remand) in light of the SG’s changed position	GVR appropriate because the Government concedes §924(c) invalid and will waive procedural bars, likely changing outcome on remand	Government asked for GVR (confessed error); lower courts had relied on waiver earlier but Gov now will waive it on remand	Court denied certiorari and did not issue a GVR; Seventh Circuit judgment stands (no vacatur)
Whether §1958(a) is a “crime of violence” under §924(c)(3)(A)	§1958 is not a crime of violence; Davis and statutory elements foreclose that predicate	Initially argued §1958 qualified; later conceded it does not	Government now concedes §1958 is not a §924(c) predicate; Supreme Court did not adjudicate the merits on this point
Effect of an unconditional guilty plea and waiver on collateral attack ( §2255 )	Waiver should not block relief when Government concedes conviction invalid and procedural bars will be waived on remand	Plea waiver bars collateral challenge; Seventh Circuit enforced the waiver	Seventh Circuit was not vacated; statement of Justice Kavanaugh agreed waiver precluded judicial relief in this posture
Whether executive clemency is an adequate avenue for relief	Courts should remedy unlawful detention; GVR and judicial processes are the proper corrections	Executive (President) has unilateral pardon/commutation power; DOJ/AG can recommend clemency	Justice Kavanaugh noted clemency is available and appropriate if Executive wishes; this does not alter the Court’s denial of GVR

Key Cases Cited

Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (held ACCA residual clause unconstitutionally vague)
Lawrence v. Chater, 516 U.S. 163 (per curiam) (explains GVR practice and "reasonable probability" standard for remand)
Stutson v. United States, 516 U.S. 193 (per curiam) (discusses solicitude for imprisoned litigants in GVR context)
De Baca v. United States, 189 U.S. 505 (1903) (early exemplar of Court granting relief on Government confession of error)
Ballin v. Magone, 140 U.S. 670 (1891) (historical practice of vacatur/remand by consent of Attorney General)
Wood v. Milyard, 566 U.S. 463 (2012) (procedural defenses may be waivable on collateral review)
Wellons v. Hall, 558 U.S. 220 (2010) (GVR appropriate where lower court gave perfunctory consideration to merits)