Legal Opinion

United States v. Gentry

District Court, D. Oregon

Decided July 7, 2016No. Case No. 3:12-cr-00604-SIPublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION AND ORDER

Michael H. Simon, District Judge.

On April 1, 2016, Defendant Steven Wayne Gentry (“Gentry”) moved to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Gentry argues that the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551, 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015), now establishes that the specific provision in the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines (the “Guidelines”) that significantly increased his base offense level is unconstitutionally vague and was adopted by the sentencing court in error. The United States (the “Government”) opposes the motion.…

2Cases cited29 opinions

  1. Miller-El v. CockrellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  2. Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. United States v. FradySupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Bousley v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1998

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Aquileo Melchor-Zaragoza v. United States of AmericaDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2018
  2. Richard Neal Sutton v. Charles L. Ryan, et al.District Court, D. Arizona · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API