White v. United States, 2:20-cv-02301

Background

Jermaine White pled guilty (no plea agreement) to being a felon in possession of a firearm (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)) and was sentenced on April 27, 2018 as an armed career criminal to 180 months’ imprisonment and 2 years’ supervised release.
The Sixth Circuit affirmed White’s conviction on direct appeal. White later filed a § 2255 motion (placed in mail April 15, 2020) advancing Rehaif-based claims: actual innocence, an indictment defect, and an involuntary plea arising from lack of knowledge-of-status element.
The Government opposed, arguing procedural default and that White could not show Rehaif error caused a miscarriage of justice; it also opposed a later motion to amend under Borden because Tennessee aggravated robbery convictions qualified as ACCA predicates.
The district court applied Rehaif and Greer, reviewed procedural-default/actual-innocence standards, and examined the plea and PSR admissions (including White’s statement that he knew he could not have a gun).
The court denied White’s motion to amend (Borden claim) as futile, concluded White’s Rehaif-based § 2255 claims were procedurally defaulted and without merit, denied relief, refused a certificate of appealability, and certified any appeal would not be taken in good faith.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rehaif error entitles White to § 2255 relief / overcomes procedural default by showing actual innocence	White: Rehaif created a constitutional defect; he lacked knowledge he was prohibited because he believed his rights were restored after state release	Government: White procedurally defaulted; record (PSR and his admissions) shows he knew he was a felon, so he cannot show factual innocence or prejudice	Denied — claims procedurally defaulted; White failed to show actual (factual) innocence or reasonable likelihood he would have prevailed at trial or avoided pleading guilty
Whether the indictment was deficient for failing to allege § 924(a)(2) / knowledge-of-status element	White: Indictment omitted the knowledge-of-status element and did not cite § 924(a)(2)	Government: Omission does not affect jurisdiction or fairness given admissions and evidence	Denied — indictment defect is not jurisdictional and omission does not warrant relief under controlling precedent
Whether White’s plea was involuntary because counsel did not advise on the knowledge-of-status element	White: Counsel misadvised; he would have gone to trial if he had known the Government had to prove he knew his prohibited status	Government: After-the-fact assertion; record lacks contemporaneous evidence to support claim; felony status unlikely to be unknown	Denied — Greer/Wallace: Rehaif error in plea is not structural; plea claim is procedurally defaulted and unsupported by contemporaneous evidence
Whether to permit amendment under Borden to challenge ACCA enhancement	White: Borden holds reckless mens rea offenses are not ACCA violent felonies; his sentence relied on a reckless aggravated assault predicate	Government: White has multiple Tennessee aggravated robbery convictions that are categorical ACCA predicates; amendment would be futile	Denied — amendment futile because White’s aggravated robbery convictions qualify as violent felonies under Sixth Circuit precedent

Key Cases Cited

Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019) (government must prove defendant knew both possession and his prohibited status under § 922(g))
Greer v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 2090 (2021) (Rehaif errors are not structural; courts may review the entire record for prejudice)
Borden v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 1817 (2021) (offenses with only a reckless mens rea do not qualify as violent felonies under the ACCA elements clause)
Wallace v. United States, 43 F.4th 595 (6th Cir. 2022) (Rehaif requires knowledge of felon status; claims may be procedurally defaulted and face heavy skepticism)
United States v. Hobbs, 953 F.3d 853 (6th Cir. 2020) (failure to allege status element in indictment does not deprive court of jurisdiction)
United States v. Raymore, 965 F.3d 475 (6th Cir. 2020) (omission of knowledge requirement in indictment does not necessarily affect fairness where admissions and evidence establish the offense)
United States v. Gloss, 661 F.3d 317 (6th Cir. 2011) (Tennessee aggravated robbery qualifies as a violent felony under ACCA)
Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (1998) (§ 2255 is not a substitute for direct appeal; actual innocence standard explained)
United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 (2002) (defects in an indictment are not jurisdictional)
Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2003) (standard for issuance of a certificate of appealability)