Lash v. United States
4:16-cv-00840
E.D. Mo.Jul 14, 2017Background
- Movant Anthony Lash pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute heroin (21 U.S.C. § 846) and was sentenced to 151 months.
- At sentencing the court designated Lash a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 based on two prior felony convictions: one for a crime of violence and one for a controlled substance offense.
- The career-offender designation produced a Guidelines range of 151–188 months, and the court imposed the low-end sentence of 151 months.
- Lash filed a § 2255 motion arguing his career-offender enhancement is invalid in light of Johnson v. United States (voiding the ACCA residual clause as vague).
- The government did not file a response; the court considered whether Johnson or related precedent invalidated the Sentencing Guidelines provision used to enhance Lash.
- The court denied relief, holding Johnson (ACCA) does not apply and Beckles forecloses a vagueness challenge to the Guidelines’ "crime of violence" definition; no hearing was required and no certificate of appealability was issued.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Lash's career-offender enhancement is invalid under Johnson | Johnson voided the ACCA residual clause for vagueness; Lash argues similar vagueness infects the Guidelines enhancement | Johnson applies only to ACCA; Guidelines are not subject to a vagueness challenge under the Due Process Clause | Denied — Johnson inapplicable; Beckles bars vagueness challenge to the Guidelines; enhancement stands |
| Whether a § 2255 hearing is required | Lash requests relief via § 2255 | Government did not oppose; court can deny without a hearing if record conclusively shows no entitlement to relief | Denied without a hearing — record dispositive |
| Whether to grant a certificate of appealability | Lash seeks review | Court must find a substantial showing of constitutional denial to grant COA | COA denied — Lash failed to make a substantial showing |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (2015) (ACCA residual clause held void for vagueness)
- Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017) (Sentencing Guidelines not subject to vagueness challenge under Due Process)
- Engelen v. United States, 68 F.3d 238 (8th Cir. 1995) (denial of § 2255 relief may be appropriate without a hearing when record conclusively shows no entitlement to relief)