United States v. Johnson

by
Darius Johnson was convicted for possessing cocaine with the intent to distribute, and for being a felon in possession of a firearm. For these offenses, the district court initially imposed concurrent prison terms of 192 months, relying in part on Johnson’s classification as an armed career criminal because of three prior convictions for violent felonies. The district court later vacated this sentence, concluding that one of the three prior convictions had not involved a violent felony. Having vacated the sentence, the court resentenced Johnson to concurrent prison terms of 120 months and 128 months, relying in part on his classification as a career offender because of two prior convictions for crimes of violence. The government appealed the vacatur of the initial sentence, and Johnson appealed the new sentence. The Tenth Circuit determined the district court correctly ordered vacatur and resentencing based on a new U.S. Supreme Court decision. When imposing the initial sentence, the district court classified Johnson as an armed career criminal because he had three prior convictions for violent felonies. The government conceded this classification was erroneous because the district court had relied on the Residual Clause, which the Supreme Court later struck down as unconstitutional. This constitutional error was not harmless because one of the three prior convictions could have been based on battery of a law enforcement officer, which did not constitute a violent felony. Given this possibility, the district court needed to vacate the initial sentence. Given the concession of another crime of violence, the district court did not err in sentencing Johnson as a career criminal under the sentencing guidelines. View "United States v. Johnson" on Justia Law