identical.” at **1, 6. However, because the parties had agreed that Id. “materially not affect this case,” the court for another day” whether its decision Johnson “does “[left] in 683 F.3d 358 (7th Cir. 2012) should be reconsidered. at United States v. Tichenor, Id. *1. The panel noted, that the U.S. Sentencing Commission has begun the “however, process of amending the career-offender guideline to delete the residual clause, bringing the Guidelines into alignment with The government has since conceded Johnson.” Id. that constitutional holding applies to the guidelines, and that the Seventh Johnson’s Circuit should overrule Br. of Plaintiff-Appellee at 7-14, Tichenor. See United States v. No. 15-1686 (7th Cir. Sept. 14, 2015). For excellent additional arguments Gillespie, why the Seventh Circuit should overrule and the Eighth Circuit should Tichenor, overrule 893 F.2d 156 (8th Cir. 1990), see Appellant's United States v. Wivell, Supplemental Brief, No. 14-10396 (11th Cir. Sept. 2, 2015), United States v. Matchett, .] The Department of Justice agrees as well. In a brief filed by the Criminal Division of the Appellate Section of the Department of Justice, the government conceded that constitutional holding regarding the ACCA’s residual clause applies to the Johnson’s residual clause of the career offender guideline, § 4B1.2(a)(2), and to the other guidelines that incorporate that residual clause as well. United States Attorneys Offices across the country have followed suit. [If the guideline range was increased under 2K2.1, you can specifically cite the government’s concessions in 2K2.1 cases, i.e., Pagan-Soto, and Talmore, Goodwin, Grayer Gillespie.] The Sentencing Commission also recognizes that has rendered § Johnson 4B1.2(a)(2)’s residual clause void. Because statutory language the Court found “the
“materially identical.” Id. at **1, 6. However, because the parties had agreed that Johnson “does not affect this case,” the court “[left] for another day” whether its decision in United States v. Tichenor, 683 F.3d 358 (7th Cir. 2012) should be reconsidered. Id. at *1. The panel noted, “however, that the U.S. Sentencing Commission has begun the process of amending the career-offender guideline to delete the residual clause, bringing the Guidelines into alignment with Johnson.” Id. The government has since conceded that Johnson’s constitutional holding applies to the guidelines, and that the Seventh Circuit should overrule Tichenor. See Br. of Plaintiff-Appellee at 7-14, United States v. Gillespie, No. 15-1686 (7th Cir. Sept. 14, 2015). For excellent additional arguments why the Seventh Circuit should overrule Tichenor, and the Eighth Circuit should overrule United States v. Wivell, 893 F.2d 156 (8th Cir. 1990), see Appellant's Supplemental Brief, United States v. Matchett, No. 14-10396 (11th Cir. Sept. 2, 2015), .] The Department of Justice agrees as well. In a brief filed by the Criminal Division of the Appellate Section of the Department of Justice, the government conceded that Johnson’s constitutional holding regarding the ACCA’s residual clause applies to the residual clause of the career offender guideline, § 4B1.2(a)(2), and to the other guidelines that incorporate that residual clause as well. United States Attorneys Offices across the country have followed suit. [If the guideline range was increased under 2K2.1, you can specifically cite the government’s concessions in 2K2.1 cases, i.e., Pagan-Soto, Talmore, Goodwin, Grayer and Gillespie.] The Sentencing Commission also recognizes that Johnson has rendered § 4B1.2(a)(2)’s residual clause void. Because “the statutory language the Court found
Sample-First-2255-Guidelines.docx