Sun Bear v. United States, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 14241

Background

Sun Bear pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in Indian country.
District court upward-departed based on Sun Bear's extensive violent history, including a career-offender enhancement from prior felonies: attempted auto theft and attempted burglary (and attempted escape).
Sentenced to 360 months; affirmed on direct appeal as a career offender.
Sun Bear filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion asserting Begay retroactivity as construed by Williams (8th Cir.); argued the career-offender determination was improper and § 2255 relief was warranted.
District court denied the § 2255 motion as time-barred and not cognizable; en banc court affirmed the district court’s denial, rejecting retroactivity-driven collateral relief under § 2255.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Begay retroactivity applies to Sun Bear’s §2255 challenge.	Sun Bear seeks retroactive Begay relief under §2255(f)(3) as a new substantive rule.	Government contends Begay retroactivity is limited and Sun Bear’s §2255 claim remains non-cognizable.	Not cognizable on the §2255 grounds; retroactivity not enough to grant relief.
Whether Sun Bear’s claim constitutes a miscarriage of justice under §2255.	Miscarriage of justice due to Begay-based retroactivity invalidates the career-offender ruling.	Sentence within statutory maximum and within initial guidelines; no miscarriage of justice.	No miscarriage of justice; §2255 relief denied.
Whether a guidelines-based error can be cognizable under §2255 when the sentence falls within the statutory range.	Guidelines misapplication can warrant §2255 relief.	Ordinary guideline errors are not §2255 claims absent miscarriage of justice.	Guidelines error cannot be relief-ground absent miscarriage of justice.
Timeliness and cognizability of the Begay-based claim under §2255(f)(3).	Begay originally recognized a new right retroactively; timing should toll.	Begay is retroactive but does not render Sun Bear’s claim cognizable for relief.	Timeliness and cognizability unresolved in Sun Bear II; court rejects §2255 relief.
Whether §2255 relief could be granted for a fully preserved, post-conviction change in law under Begay.	Relief granted in similar contexts due to a fundamental defect in sentencing.	Relief not available for non-statutory sentencing errors lacking miscarriage of justice.	Court declines to grant relief; no cognizable miscarriage-of-justice exception here.

Key Cases Cited

Begay v. United States, 553 U.S. 137 (2008) (retroactivity of Begay as substantive rule under §2255)
United States v. Williams, 537 F.3d 969 (8th Cir. 2008) (panel decision applying Begay to career-offender jurisprudence)
Sun Bear v. United States, Sun Bear I, 307 F.3d 747 (8th Cir. 2002) (affirmed career-offender status based on two crimes of violence)
Sun Bear v. United States, Sun Bear II, 611 F.3d 925 (8th Cir. 2010) (en banc reversal/reconsideration on Begay retroactivity and §2255 cognizability)
Davis v. United States, 417 U.S. 333 (1974) (habeas standards for collateral attacks; miscarriage of justice concept)
Hill v. United States, 368 U.S. 424 (1962) (fundamental defect and rudimentary fair procedure standard)
Timmreck v. United States, 441 U.S. 780 (1979) (harmless-error and rudimentary-fair-procedure framework in § 2255)
Addonizio v. United States, 442 U.S. 178 (1979) (miscarriage-of-justice concept in sentencing collateral review)
Gilbert v. United States, 640 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir. 2011) (en banc discussion on miscarriage-of-justice and §2255 relief for guideline errors)
Narvaez v. United States, 641 F.3d 877 (7th Cir. 2011) (sentencing-error relief within statutory range; miscarriage-of-justice analysis in §2255)
King v. United States, 595 F.3d 844 (8th Cir. 2010) (plain-error/waiver context with Guideline misapplication notion)
Welch v. United States, 604 F.3d 408 (7th Cir. 2010) (retroactivity of Begay-type rules; sentencing context)