United States v. Raymond, 466 F.Supp.3d 1008

Travis Raymond pleaded guilty (2014) to being a felon in possession (Count 1) and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine (Count 2); he was sentenced to 180 months custody concurrent on both counts.
The PSR identified Raymond as an Armed Career Criminal (ACCA) and career offender based on multiple prior convictions including Minnesota third-degree burglary, robbery convictions, terroristic threats, and fleeing a police officer.
Raymond filed a §2255 petition; the government conceded three prior convictions no longer qualified as ACCA predicates, which would remove the ACCA enhancement and lower statutory exposure on Count 1, but Raymond did not timely challenge his career-offender status for Count 2.
The district court denied relief (including a later Rule 60(b)(6) motion), relying on circuit precedent that Count 2’s sentence remained lawful under the career-offender guideline; Raymond appealed.
The Eighth Circuit vacated and remanded, directing the district court to reconsider ACCA predicate status in light of Quarles v. United States (2019); on remand the district court analyzed Quarles and related authority, concluded Minnesota third-degree burglary remains broader than generic burglary (because one statutory means requires no intent), found Raymond is not an ACCA offender, granted Rule 60(b)(6) relief, vacated judgment, and ordered resentencing on both counts.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Minnesota third-degree burglary is a categorical ACCA "violent felony" after Quarles	Quarles restored a broader remaining-in burglary definition that could make Minnesota burglary a predicate	Raymond: Minnesota third-degree burglary is broader than generic burglary because one statutory alternative requires no mens rea for the underlying offense	Court: Minnesota third-degree burglary is broader than generic burglary (does not require intent for second means); not an ACCA predicate
Whether the lack of ACCA predicate removes the mandatory minimum/statutory exposure for Count 1	Government (in remand): Quarles may change the landscape; if no ACCA, statutory max for Count 1 is 10 years and supervised release 3 years	Raymond: Without ACCA enhancement his 15-year sentence and 5-year supervised release on Count 1 are illegal and resentencing is required	Court: ACCA does not apply; Count 1 sentence exceeded statutory maximum and relief is warranted
Scope of remedy — limited resentencing on Count 1 or full resentencing on both counts	Government: if reopened, resentence only Count 1	Raymond: Court should resentence both counts because the ACCA-mandated minimum drove original sentencing on both counts	Court: Grants Rule 60(b)(6) relief and orders resentencing on both counts (supplemental PSR ordered)

Raymond v. United States, 933 F.3d 988 (8th Cir. 2019) (vacated district denial of Rule 60(b)(6) and remanded in light of Quarles)
Quarles v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 1872 (2019) (held that "remaining in" burglary includes forming intent at any time while unlawfully remaining)
United States v. McArthur, 850 F.3d 925 (8th Cir. 2017) (previously held Minnesota third-degree burglary indivisible and broader than generic burglary)
Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (definition of generic burglary for ACCA purposes)
Mathis v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 2243 (2016) (categorical and modified categorical approaches for predicate-offense analysis)
Van Cannon v. United States, 890 F.3d 656 (7th Cir. 2018) (held Minnesota burglary broader than generic burglary because it may lack intent requirement)
Chazen v. Marske, 938 F.3d 851 (7th Cir. 2019) (post-Quarles decision finding Minnesota burglary not a predicate because statute may not require mens rea)
Sun Bear v. United States, 644 F.3d 700 (8th Cir. 2011) (cited by district court in earlier Rule 60(b) analysis concerning guideline errors)
United States v. Wright, 902 F.3d 868 (8th Cir. 2018) (district court has broad discretion over §2255 remedies)
United States v. Forrest, 611 F.3d 908 (8th Cir. 2010) (discussion of categorical and modified categorical approaches)