938 F.3d 260
6th Cir.2019Background
- In 1999 Richard Vowell pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)) and agreed in his plea that his prior convictions qualified him for ACCA enhancement; he also waived most § 2255 challenges except for ineffective assistance, prosecutorial misconduct, and changes in law that negate the offense.
- The PSR listed four prior state convictions: GA burglary (1983), TN second-degree burglary (1979), TN armed robbery (1980), and TN aggravated burglary (convicted in 1998 for conduct after the federal offense).
- The district court sentenced Vowell to 180 months under the ACCA; Vowell did not appeal and later filed a § 2255 motion (2016) arguing his Georgia burglary conviction is not a qualifying ACCA predicate after Johnson and Mathis.
- The government argued the § 2255 petition was untimely and barred by the plea waiver, but conceded the 1998 Tennessee aggravated burglary could not be counted because it occurred after the federal offense.
- The district court denied relief, holding Georgia’s burglary statute is divisible and Vowell was convicted of entering a “dwelling house,” i.e., generic burglary; the Sixth Circuit granted a COA limited to the ACCA question.
- On appeal the Sixth Circuit (Moore, J.) held Vowell’s waiver did not bar a § 2255 challenge to a statutorily excessive sentence, but affirmed because Vowell’s Georgia burglary conviction qualified as an ACCA predicate under the modified categorical approach.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Vowell) | Defendant's Argument (U.S.) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the plea waiver bars Vowell’s § 2255 claim | Waiver should not bar challenge because subsequent case law (Johnson/Mathis) may render his sentence illegal | Waiver was knowing and voluntary and thus bars the § 2255 challenge | Waiver does not bar a claim that the sentence exceeds the statutory maximum; Caruthers rule applies to § 2255 motions, so Vowell may litigate the ACCA claim |
| Whether Georgia burglary (1983) is a qualifying ACCA predicate | GA statute is broader than generic burglary and indivisible, so conviction cannot serve as an ACCA predicate | GA statute is divisible; indictment and judgment show Vowell was convicted of entering a "dwelling house," which is generic burglary | Georgia burglary conviction qualifies as generic burglary under the modified categorical approach; counts as an ACCA predicate |
| Whether Tennessee aggravated burglary (1998) counts as a prior conviction | Argues it cannot be counted because conviction occurred after the federal offense | Government conceded the 1998 conviction is not a prior conviction for ACCA purposes | 1998 Tennessee conviction does not count because it postdates the federal offense (government concession) |
| Whether Johnson’s invalidation of the residual clause affects Vowell’s ACCA designation | Johnson may eliminate predicates that relied on residual clause language | Johnson applies only to residual-clause predicates; if convictions fall under enumerated or elements clause they remain valid | Johnson does not help Vowell because his predicates—including Georgia burglary as generic burglary—fall within the enumerated-offenses clause |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (invalidating ACCA residual clause as unconstitutionally vague)
- Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (distinguishing elements from means; divisibility and the modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Stitt, 139 S. Ct. 399 (2018) (construing Tennessee habitation/aggravated burglary language consistent with generic burglary)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (definition of generic burglary and categorical approach)
- Shepard v. United States, 544 U.S. 13 (2005) (limiting documents courts may consult under modified categorical approach)
- United States v. Caruthers, 458 F.3d 459 (6th Cir.) (appellate waiver does not bar challenge that sentence exceeds statutory maximum)
- Richardson v. United States, 890 F.3d 616 (6th Cir.) (Georgia burglary is divisible; use modified categorical approach to determine if conviction was for generic burglary)