MARTIN
v.
UNITED STATES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's report, denying the motion to vacate sentence, and found that Hobbs Act Robbery categorically qualifies as a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
Movant filed a motion to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, arguing his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) was invalid based on United State…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Residual Clause cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report of Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid, (“Report,” D.E. 10), issued August 11, 2020, recommending that the Court deny Movant Jahmal Akeem Martin’s Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence, (“Motion,” D.E. 1), filed on or about July 4, 2019. Specifically, Judge Reid found that Movant’s claim under United States v. Davis, __ U.S. __, 139 S. Ct. 2319, 2336 (2019) fails because Movant cannot meet his burden under Beeman v. United States, 871 F. 3d 1215, 1221, 1225 (11th Cir. 2017) of showing that he was convicted under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)’s residual clause because the predicate “crime of violence”—Hobbs Act Robbery—categorically qualifies as a crime of violence under 924(c)’s “use-of-force” clause. (Report at 4-6 (citing United States v. Hubtert, 909 F. 3d 335, 345-46 (11th Cir. 2018)).) The Report provides the Parties with fourteen (14) days to file objections. As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed. Failure to file objections shall bar parties
from attacking on appeal the factual findings contained in the report. See Resolution Trust Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F. 2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993). However, the Court must resolve one factual discrepancy: on page 2 of the Report, Judge Reid correctly states that Movant was sentenced to 42 months’ imprisonment on the Hobbs Act Robbery conviction. See United States v. Martin, 10-20896-Cr-King, Judgment (D.E. 206) at 2
(S.D. Fla. Sept. 22, 2011). However, on page 3 of the Report, Judge Reid incorrectly states that Movant was sentenced to 120 months’ imprisonment on the Hobbs Act Robbery conviction. Page 3 of the Report is hereby MODIFIED to reflect that Movant was sentenced to a total of 126 months’ imprisonment, consisting of 42 months on the Hobbs Act Robbery conviction, and a consecutive 84 months on the 924(c) conviction.
Therefore, after an independent review of the Report and record, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: 1. The Report of the Magistrate Judge (D.E. 17) issued on August 11, 2020, is ADOPTED as modified herein; 2. Movant Jahmal Akeem Martin’s Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to Vacate,
Set Aside, or Correct Sentence (D.E. 1) is DENIED; 3. A certificate of appealability SHALL NOT ISSUE; 4. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; and
5. This case is now CLOSED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida this 14th day of September, 2020.
ax A. LENARD ¢ as
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144 (11th Cir. 1993)
- Weeks v. United States, 871 F. 3d 1215 (11th Cir. 2019)
- United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (U.S. 2019)
- United States v. ST. Hubert, 909 F.3d 335 (11th Cir. 2018)