Jerry James Morris, Jr. v. United States
516 F. App'x 882
11th Cir.2013Background
- Morris, a federal prisoner, pled guilty to felon in possession of a firearm with three prior Florida felony convictions (battery, aggravated battery, selling cocaine).
- District court sentenced Morris under the ACCA to the 15-year minimum based on those priors; no direct appeal filed.
- Morris filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion on April 12, 2010 asserting Johnson v. United States retroactively applying to collateral review nullifies ACCA sentencing.
- District court dismissed the motion as untimely, holding Johnson not retroactive on collateral review.
- Court of Appeals granted a COA and vacates/remands to decide (a) Johnson retroactivity on collateral review, and (b) whether Morris’s felony battery qualifies as a violent felony.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is Johnson retroactive on collateral review under Teague framework? | Morris—Johnson retroactively applies to collateral review. | Government—retroactivity applies to collateral review as Johnson announced new rule. | Johnson retroactive; remand for merits of ACCA classification. |
| Does erroneous ACCA sentence violate due process? | Morris asserts due process violation from overlong ACCA sentence. | Government concedes due process issue but argues proper sentencing under ACCA. | Yes, erroneous ACCA sentence violates due process; vacate/remand for determination. |
| Does a Florida battery under § 784.03 qualify as a violent felony under ACCA after Johnson? | Felony battery does not categorically meet violent-force standard. | Not addressed; district court to decide on that issue on remand. | District court to determine whether Morris’s battery qualifies as a violent felony. |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (2010) (defines physical force; Johnson retroactively applicable on collateral review)
- Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (1989) (teaching on retroactivity of new rules; watershed and implied exceptions)
- Gilbert v. United States, 640 F.3d 1293 (Eleventh Cir. 2011) (en banc; sentencing under ACCA can exceed statutory maximum when erroneous)
- Figuereo-Sanchez v. United States, 678 F.3d 1203 (Eleventh Cir. 2012) (Teague retroactivity analysis for § 2255(f)(3))
- Rhode v. United States, 583 F.3d 1289 (Eleventh Cir. 2009) (scope of § 2255(a) and collateral attack standards)