Zenon Grzegorczyk v. United States, 997 F.3d 743

In April 2012 Grzegorczyk hired two individuals (who were undercover officers) to murder his ex-wife and five others, provided photos, license-plate numbers, a down payment, and later delivered $3,000 plus a duffle containing $45,000, a 9mm pistol, and loaded magazines before his arrest.
He pled guilty in July 2014 to one count of murder-for-hire (18 U.S.C. § 1958(a)) and one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)).
The written plea agreement included an unconditional waiver of "all appellate issues that might have been available if he had exercised his right to trial," permitting appeal only as to plea validity and sentence.
The district court sentenced him to 151 months for the §1958 offense and a consecutive 60 months for the §924(c) conviction; this judgment was affirmed on direct appeal.
After Johnson and later Davis narrowed the definition of "crime of violence" by invalidating the residual clause, Grzegorczyk filed a §2255 petition seeking to vacate his §924(c) conviction on the ground that murder-for-hire is not a crime of violence under the elements clause.
The district court denied relief as waived by the unconditional plea; the Seventh Circuit affirmed, holding the statutory-sufficiency challenge was forfeited by the guilty plea and the plea itself was valid.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Grzegorczyk may collaterally attack his §924(c) conviction after pleading guilty, arguing the predicate (murder-for-hire) is not a "crime of violence" under §924(c)(3)(A) after Davis	Grzegorczyk: Davis requires predicates to satisfy the elements clause; murder-for-hire does not; conviction should be vacated	Government: Unconditional guilty plea waived challenges to the indictment and statutory interpretation; Class does not preserve this claim; claim is statutory, not a claim of immunity	Waived: Unconditional guilty plea waived the statutory-sufficiency challenge; §2255 relief denied and conviction affirmed
Whether Class v. United States allows this constitutional-style challenge despite a guilty plea	Grzegorczyk: Class permits constitutional challenges that do not contradict plea facts	Government: Class is limited to claims that challenge the government's power to criminalize the admitted conduct; this is a statutory-construction issue	Court: Class is inapplicable; this is statutory construction waived by plea
Whether the guilty plea was involuntary or lacked notice because Johnson/Davis changed the law after the plea	Grzegorczyk: Change in law meant he lacked "real notice" of the charge's scope	Government: Post-plea changes do not undermine voluntariness; procedural default applies	Denied: Plea was voluntary and intelligent; claim procedurally defaulted and insufficient for plain-error relief

Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. 591 (2015) (invalidated ACCA residual clause as unconstitutionally vague)
United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019) (extended Johnson reasoning to invalidate §924(c)'s residual clause)
Class v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 798 (2018) (guilty plea does not automatically waive challenges to government's power to criminalize admitted conduct)
Broce v. United States, 488 U.S. 563 (1989) (guilty pleas generally foreclose collateral challenges to claimed errors that could have been raised before trial)
Davila v. United States, 843 F.3d 729 (7th Cir. 2016) (guilty-plea waiver bars collateral challenge to §924(c) based on residual-clause reasoning)
United States v. Wheeler, 857 F.3d 742 (7th Cir. 2017) (unconditional guilty plea waives contentions that an indictment fails to state an offense)
Oliver v. United States, 951 F.3d 841 (7th Cir. 2020) (Class is not broad enough to overcome guilty-plea waiver for statutory-construction challenges)
Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (1998) (standards for showing plea invalidity via §2255: cause and prejudice or actual innocence)