Case: 18-13680 Date Filed: 11/02/2018 Page: 1 of 7 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 18-13680-F ________________________ IN RE: TRACY GARRETT, Petitioner. __________________________ Application for Leave to File a Second or Successive Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h) _________________________ Before WILLIAM PRYOR, HULL, and JULIE CARNES, Circuit Judges. WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit Judge: Tracy Garrett has applied, for the thirteenth time, for leave to file a second or successive motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his federal sentence, see 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b)(3)(A), 2255(h). His application, read liberally, asserts several putative claims. One of them is that the residual clause in the definition of “crime of violence” in section 924(c), see 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B), is unconstitutionally vague in the light of Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), and Sessions v. Dimaya, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018). But we have held en banc that section 924(c)(3)(B) is not unconstitutionally vague because it requires a conduct-based Case: 18-13680 Date Filed: 11/02/2018 Page: 2 of 7 instead of a categorical approach. See Ovalles v. United States, 905 F.3d 1231, 1253 (11th Cir. 2018) (en banc). We have specifically explained, and at length, that this feature of section 924(c)(3)(B) allows it to withstand the reasoning that led the Supreme Court to hold in Johnson and Dimaya that similarly worded residual clauses in other federal statutes are unconstitutionally vague. See id. at 1237–52. It follows that Garrett’s vagueness challenge to section 924(c)(3)(B)—like any identical challenge by any federal prisoner—cannot support a second or successive motion. His other claims also fail. We dismiss Garrett’s application to the extent that it repeats claims from his earlier applications, and we deny the remainder. Garrett is serving a total term of 480 months of imprisonment after his convictions for two counts of carjacking, see 18 U.S.C. § 2119; two counts of bank robbery, see id. § 2113(a); and two counts of carrying a firearm during the commission of a crime of violence, see id. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii), (C)(i). According to his presentence investigation report, Garrett, on two separate occasions, approached women exiting their cars, threatened them with a gun, demanded their car keys, and drove away in their vehicles. When one of the victims hesitated to surrender her keys, Garrett shoved her to the ground, grabbed her purse, removed the keys, and drove off. Garrett never objected to this description of his conduct. Most of Garrett’s total sentence stems from the stiff consecutive sentences federal law imposes on 2 Case: 18-13680 Date Filed: 11/02/2018 Page: 3 of 7 criminals who use or carry firearms during crimes of violence, see id. § 924(c)(1)(A), especially those who do so more than once, see id. § 924(c)(1)(C). Garrett appealed his convictions, but this Court affirmed them. See United States v. Garrett, No. 09-15033 (11th Cir. July 21, 2010). He filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence, see 28 U.S.C. § 2255, ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals