Free Newsletter
SENTENCING Residual Clause; Successive Motion
cassiejohnson//December 14, 2015//
Listen to this article
Where a defendant sought authorization to file a successive motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence, arguing that his sentence exceeded the statutory maximum in light of Johnson v. U.S., which held that the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. Section 924(e) (2) (B)(ii) was unconstitutionally vague, circuit precedent required that the defendant’s motion be granted.
Motion granted.
15-3550 Menteer v. U.S., appealed from the Western District of Missouri, Colloton, J.
Top News
- Federal court rules brokerage firm breached 1994 contract
- Court denies revocation of adoption
- UnitedHealth suit alleges faulty AI led to denied claims
- Judge asked to block part of a North Dakota abortion law
- Court dismisses bias, retaliation lawsuit
- Joint-employer rule set to roil workplace — once again
- 8th Circuit rules private plaintiffs can’t sue under Voting Rights Act
- Commentary: Right-to-repair fight centers on data transmitted by newer cars
Expert Testimony
- Quandaries & Quagmires: Risky business and tips for managing the risk
- Perspectives: JFK assassination: 60 years of litigation here
- Perspectives: Lincoln’s memorable address recalls impact here
- The Unfrazzled Lawyer: Five benefits of becoming an unfrazzled lawyer
