Pakala v. United States
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 18148
1st Cir.2015Background
- Petitioner John Pakala is serving a 235-month sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA).
- Pakala previously appealed and this Court upheld his sentence, relying on two prior Florida convictions that the panel treated as ACCA "violent felonies" under the residual clause. United States v. Pakala, 568 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2009).
- Pakala seeks permission under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h) to file a second or successive habeas motion in the district court, invoking the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, which invalidated the ACCA residual clause as unconstitutionally vague.
- At the certification stage the court’s inquiry is limited: it asks whether the application makes a prima facie showing that it meets § 2255(h)’s gatekeeping requirements (a new rule made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court).
- The government conceded that Johnson announced a new rule of constitutional law and that Pakala has at least made a prima facie showing of Johnson’s retroactivity.
- Based on the government’s concessions, the court granted certification to file the successive § 2255 petition and denied appointment of counsel as moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Johnson creates a new rule qualifying as a basis for a second/successive § 2255 motion under § 2255(h)(2) | Johnson invalidated the ACCA residual clause, so Pakala’s sentence may now be unsupported and Johnson is a new rule applicable to him | Government conceded Johnson is a new rule and that Pakala made a prima facie showing of retroactivity | Court certified that Pakala made the requisite prima facie showing and allowed filing of the successive petition |
| Whether the application makes a prima facie showing that Johnson was made retroactive to cases on collateral review by the Supreme Court | Pakala asserted Johnson has been made retroactive and thus satisfies § 2255(h)(2) | Government conceded that Pakala at least made a prima facie showing of retroactivity | Court accepted the concession and authorized filing in district court |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Pakala, 568 F.3d 47 (1st Cir. 2009) (prior panel decision upholding Pakala’s ACCA sentence based on residual clause analysis)
- Evans-Garcia v. United States, 744 F.3d 235 (1st Cir. 2014) (framework for prima facie review of successive § 2255 applications)
- Price v. United States, 795 F.3d 731 (7th Cir. 2015) (granting certification under § 2255(h)(2) on grounds Johnson is retroactive)