In Weeks v. United States, No. 17-10049 (July 22,
2019) (Anderson, Tjoflat, Jordan), the Court reversed the denial of a
2255 motion based on Johnson, finding that the movant met his burden
under Beeman.
The Court held that, where the movant challenged his ACCA
enhancement on appeal, the relevant time frame to consider whether the residual
clause solely caused the enhancement extends through the direct appeal. Thus, any precedents decided in that interim
period may be considered. So too may the
appellate opinion in that very case, as well as the briefs filed in that appeal. The Court found that statements in Beeman
and Pickett about the question being a "historical fact" were
dicta, so they did not preclude a court from considering events through appeal. In this case, the Court considered
intervening legal precedents and the appellate proceedings to conclude that the
movant met hits burden as it pertained to Massachusetts convictions.
