Godbee v. United States
This text of 711 F. App'x 588 (Godbee v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Burnett Godbee appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his sentence for conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, attempted Hobbs Act robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, discharge of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(l)(A)(ii), and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Godbee contends Johnson v. United States, — U.S. —, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015), invalidated 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B), and his convictions for Hobbs Act robbery and conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery do not otherwise qualify as crimes of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A).
When we granted Godbee a certificate of appealability on whether Johnson’s void-for-vagueness ruling extends to § 924(c)(3)(B), we had not yet addressed the issue. We have, however, since concluded that Johnson’s void-for-vagueness ruling does not extend to § 924(c)(3)(B). See Ovalles v. United States, 861 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2017). Godbee’s claim is foreclosed by Ovalles. Therefore, the denial of his § 2255 motion is
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
711 F. App'x 588, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/godbee-v-united-states-ca11-2018.