United States v. Ramos
681 F. App'x 672
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- Ramos pled guilty on Dec 13, 2011 to felon in possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1), 924(a)(2).
- PSI revealed at least two prior controlled-substances convictions.
- District court sentenced Ramos as a career offender under § 4B1.1, imposing a 110-month term.
- Ramos filed a § 2255 motion on Jun 28, 2016 seeking relief under Johnson v. United States.
- District court denied the § 2255 motion; Ramos seeks a COA and to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Johnson-based challenge to the career-offender enhancement remains viable after Beckles. | Ramos argues Johnson renders the enhancement unconstitutional. | Beckles held Guidelines are not subject to vagueness challenges; Johnson not applicable. | No reasonable jurist could debate the district court’s resolution; COA denied. |
| Whether the § 2255 motion was properly denied on the merits given Beckles. | Ramos contends Johnson applies to invalidate his career-offender designation. | Beckles forecloses relief under the Guidelines; Johnson not applicable to Ramos. | Beckles bars relief; COA denied. |
| Whether Ramos may proceed in forma pauperis on appeal. | Ramos seeks in forma pauperis status. | Lack of a reasoned, nonfrivolous argument warrants denial. | Denied the application to proceed in forma pauperis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017) (Guidelines not subject to vagueness challenges; Johnson not controlling for Guidelines career-offender provisions)
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (Johnson vagueness in ACCA residual clause; not applicable to Ramos's sentence here)
- Davis v. Roberts, 425 F.3d 830 (10th Cir. 2005) (COA standard for § 2255 appeals)
- Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 134 (2012) (cites jurisdictional requirement for COA in § 2253(c))
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (COA standard for evaluating constitutional claims)
- McIntosh v. U.S. Parole Comm’n, 115 F.3d 809 (10th Cir. 1997) (denial of in forma pauperis based on frivolousness)
- Beckles v. United States, 137 S. Ct. 886 (2017) (reiterated Beckles holding about Guidelines vagueness)