In Hollis v. United States, No. 19-11323 (May 6,
2020) (William Pryor, Branch, Luck) (per curiam), the Court, without oral
argument, affirmed the denial of a pro se 2255 based on ineffective
assistance.
The movant argued that his lawyer was ineffective for
failing to object to the use of his prior Alabama and Georgia drugs convictions
as “serious drug offenses” under the ACCA and “controlled substance offenses”
under the career offender Guideline. The
Court ruled that the lawyer was not deficient because those convictions
categorically qualify as predicates offenses.
