Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Ward v. United States

United States District Court, M.D. Tennessee, Nashville Division

August 29, 2019

CHARLES WARD, JR., Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION

          ELI RICHARDSON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         Pending is Petitioner Charles Ward, Jr.'s Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence. (Doc. No. 1, “2255 Petition”). For the reasons set forth below, the 2255 Petition will be denied.

         Via the 2255 Petition, Petitioner challenges the sentence imposed in his underlying federal criminal case (this Court's Case No. 3:13-cr-00048). In that case, on March 17, 2014, a jury found Petitioner guilty of the crime of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). At sentencing, the sentencing judge enhanced Petitioner's sentence in accordance with the Armed Career Criminal Act (18 U.S.C. § 924(e), “ACCA”), because the judge found that Petitioner had more than the minimum number of “violent felonies” necessary to trigger an enhanced sentence under the ACCA. Specifically, a defendant convicted of a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) receives a mandatory minimum 15-year sentence if, prior to the violation, he or she had at least three previous convictions for a “violent felony” (or “serious drug offense, ” though none appear in this case) committed on occasions different from one another, and the sentencing judge found that Petitioner had nine such prior “violent felonies.”

         A “violent felony” for purposes of the ACCA is an offense that: (a) has as an element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another; or (b) is burglary, arson, extortion, involves use of explosives, or otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another. See § 922(e)2(B). The first part of the second clause is referred to as the “enumerated clause, ” while the second (i.e., post-comma) part of the second clause is referred to as the “residual clause.”

         It is undisputed that Petitioner had the following prior felony convictions and that each preceded the date of his § 922(g) violation, which occurred on July 12, 2012:

(a) A 1975 conviction in Tennessee for Robbery;
(b) A 1975 conviction in Tennessee for Burglary in the 2nd Degree;
(c) A March 7, 1979 conviction in Tennessee for Armed Robbery with a Deadly Weapon based on an August 12, 1978 incident (Davidson County Criminal Court Case No. C3719);
(d) A March 7, 1979 conviction in Tennessee for Armed Robbery with a Deadly Weapon based on an August 22, 1978 incident (Davidson County Criminal Court Case No. D3648);
(e) A March 3, 1983 conviction in Tennessee for Armed Robbery (imposed in Davidson County Criminal Case No. D0973) based on a July 19, 1982 incident;
(f) A March 3, 1983 conviction (also imposed in Case No. D0973) in Tennessee for Armed Robbery based on a July 23, 1982 incident;[1]
(g) A 1995 conviction in Tennessee for Aggravated Robbery;
(h) A 2007 conviction in Kentucky for Robbery in the 2nd Degree;
(i) A 2007 conviction in Kentucky for Robbery in the 2nd ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.