Larry Slusser v. United States, 895 F.3d 437

Larry Slusser pleaded guilty in 2011 to being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)) and received a 180-month mandatory ACCA sentence based on at least three predicate convictions (including a 1999 Tennessee Class C aggravated assault).
His plea agreement included an express, knowing, and voluntary waiver of the right to file § 2255 motions or otherwise collaterally attack his conviction or sentence, with limited exceptions for ineffective assistance of counsel or prosecutorial misconduct.
Slusser did not appeal his conviction or sentence. He filed an initial § 2255 in 2012 (denied) raising ineffective assistance and prosecutorial misconduct claims.
After Johnson v. United States, Slusser sought authorization to file a second or successive § 2255 challenging ACCA application; this Court granted authorization to proceed but the district court denied relief and found the appeal not taken in good faith.
The Sixth Circuit granted a certificate of appealability to decide whether the 1999 Tennessee aggravated assault conviction remains an ACCA "violent felony" post-Johnson, but the government argued Slusser’s waiver bars the § 2255 challenge.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Slusser’s § 2255 challenge to his ACCA designation is barred by his plea-waiver	Waiver should not bar a collateral attack that effectively argues his sentence exceeds the statutory maximum post-Johnson	The plea agreement includes a knowing and voluntary waiver of collateral attack rights; such waivers are enforceable even when later law changes might benefit the defendant	Waiver enforced; court need not reach whether the 1999 conviction qualifies as a violent felony

Davila v. United States, 258 F.3d 448 (6th Cir. 2001) (standard of review for collateral-attack waivers)
Watson v. United States, 165 F.3d 486 (6th Cir. 1999) (knowing and voluntary collateral-attack waivers are enforceable)
Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2251 (U.S. 2015) (holding ACCA residual clause void for vagueness)
Cox v. United States, [citation="695 F. App'x 851"] (6th Cir. 2017) (enforcing plea waiver against Johnson-based challenge)
Morrison v. United States, 852 F.3d 488 (6th Cir. 2017) (post-Johnson enforcement of appeal waivers)
Caruthers v. United States, 458 F.3d 459 (6th Cir. 2006) (dicta noting appellate waiver may not preclude statutory-maximum challenge)
Bradley v. United States, 400 F.3d 459 (6th Cir. 2005) (defendants assume the risk that law may change after plea)