United States v. Withee, 1:18-cr-00163

Withee pleaded guilty to a four-count Information charging: possession with intent to distribute cocaine base and heroin (21 U.S.C. § 841), being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)), and possession of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)).
In exchange for his plea the government agreed to recommend a 96-month sentence, dismissed other charges, and declined certain enhancements; the guideline range was 262–327 months. The court imposed 96 months.
Withee filed a § 2255 motion seeking vacatur of the felon-in-possession count under Rehaif v. United States and of the § 924(c) count under United States v. Davis.
Withee did not file a direct appeal and did not raise these arguments at plea or sentencing, so they are procedurally defaulted.
The government opposed the motion, arguing default, lack of prejudice, and absence of actual innocence.
The court denied the § 2255 motion and declined to issue a certificate of appealability.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Rehaif challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) conviction	Rehaif requires proof that defendant knew he was a felon; Withee lacked that knowledge	Claim is procedurally defaulted; record and plea benefits show he knew convictions and would not have rejected plea	Denied: procedurally defaulted; no cause or prejudice shown; would not have gone to trial
Davis challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) conviction	Davis renders the "crime of violence" definition void for vagueness and undermines the § 924(c) conviction	Davis does not affect the "drug trafficking crime" element; claim is procedurally defaulted and plea benefits show Withee would still have pleaded	Denied: procedurally defaulted; no cause or prejudice; Davis would not have changed plea decision

Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) (requires Government to prove defendant knew his prohibited status under § 922(g))
United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019) (holds § 924(c)(3) definition of "crime of violence" unconstitutionally vague)
Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (1998) (procedural default; actual-innocence gateway to habeas)
Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (prejudice inquiry for plea-based claims: would defendant have insisted on trial)
Schlup v. Delo, 513 U.S. 298 (1995) (actual innocence standard to overcome procedural default)
United States v. Addonizio, 442 U.S. 178 (1979) (§ 2255 relief standards)
Frady v. United States, 456 U.S. 152 (1982) (prejudice standard for collateral review)
Oakes v. United States, 400 F.3d 92 (1st Cir. 2005) (limits on collateral attack to guilty pleas)