Christopher Cummings v. United States

681 F. App'x 523
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
DecidedMarch 21, 2017
Docket16-1636
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 681 F. App'x 523 (Christopher Cummings v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Christopher Cummings v. United States, 681 F. App'x 523 (7th Cir. 2017).

Opinion

ORDER

In 2006, Cummings pled guilty to distributing cocaine. The district court sentenced him as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. To be sentenced as a career offender, § 4Bl.l(a) requires the defendant to have “at least two prior felo *524 ny convictions of either a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense.” Cummings previously had been convicted in Wisconsin for possessing cocaine with intent to distribute and for discharging a firearm from a vehicle. He argued that discharging a firearm from a vehicle was not a crime of violence and thus he could not be sentenced as a career offender. The district court held, however, that discharging a firearm was a crime of violence under the sentencing guideline’s residual clause.

In 2015, the Supreme Court held that the residual clause in the Armed Career Criminal Act was unconstitutionally vague. Johnson v. United States, — U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015). After Johnson, Cummings filed a petition for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He argues that because the language in the sentencing guideline’s residual clause is identical to the language in the ACCA’s residual clause, the sentencing- guideline’s residual clause is also unconstitutionally vague.

We had held that the sentencing guideline’s residual clause was unconstitutionally vague after Johnson in United States v. Hurlburt, 835 F.3d 715 (7th Cir. 2016). But this week, the Supreme Court held that the sentencing guidelines are not subject to due-process vagueness challenges. Beckles v. United States, 580 U.S. —, —, 137 S.Ct. 886, 197 L.Ed.2d 145 (2017). Cummings’s argument is thus without merit.

AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Garza v. United States
N.D. Indiana, 2019

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
681 F. App'x 523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/christopher-cummings-v-united-states-ca7-2017.