United States v. Smith
712 F. App'x 789
| 10th Cir. | 2017Background
- In 2001 Billy D. Smith, Jr. was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and sentenced under the ACCA based on two Oklahoma firearm robberies and a second-degree burglary.
- At sentencing Smith only challenged whether his Oklahoma burglary matched the ACCA’s "generic" burglary (enumerated-offense) definition; he did not contest that the robberies were violent felonies at that time.
- The sentencing court quoted the ACCA’s elements/force clause and the enumerated-offenses clause but omitted the residual clause when explaining its ruling; this sentence was affirmed on direct appeal.
- After Johnson v. United States invalidated the ACCA’s residual clause for vagueness and Welch made Johnson retroactive on collateral review, Smith obtained authorization to file a second § 2255 motion asserting Johnson-based relief.
- The district court denied the § 2255 motion on the merits, finding the sentencing court did not rely on the residual clause; Smith sought a certificate of appealability (COA) from this court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the sentencing court relied on the ACCA residual clause | Smith: record unclear; sentencing may have relied on residual clause, so Johnson relief applies | Government: sentencing focused on elements and enumerated clauses; residual clause was not relied on | Court: No reasonable jurist could debate that the residual clause played no role; COA denied |
| Whether robberies qualify under the ACCA force/elements clause today | Smith: under current law the robbery convictions do not satisfy the elements clause | Government: sentencing court treated robberies as falling within ACCA definition at the time | Court: Did not reach merits because sentencing court’s reliance is dispositive; no COA |
| Whether burglary is an ACCA enumerated offense under current law | Smith: Oklahoma burglary does not match generic burglary and thus is not an enumerated ACCA predicate | Government: sentencing court treated burglary as an enumerated offense at sentencing | Court: Did not decide on current-category issue; focused on lack of reliance on residual clause |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (invalidated ACCA residual clause as unconstitutionally vague)
- Welch v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 1257 (2016) (held Johnson is retroactive on collateral review)
- Taylor v. United States, 495 U.S. 575 (1990) (established the "generic burglary" categorical approach for ACCA analysis)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (standard for granting a certificate of appealability)