Case: 17-14830 Date Filed: 01/08/2019 Page: 1 of 13 [PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT ________________________ No. 17-14830 Non-Argument Calendar ________________________ D.C. Docket Nos. 0:16-cv-61410-DMM, 0:08-cr-60090-DMM-1 CURTIS SOLOMON, Petitioner-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ________________________ (January 8, 2019) Before WILLIAM PRYOR, GRANT and HULL, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Curtis Solomon appeals following the district court’s denial of his authorized successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his Case: 17-14830 Date Filed: 01/08/2019 Page: 2 of 13 sentence. Back in 2017, the district court granted Solomon a certificate of appealability (“COA”) on the issue of whether the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States, 576 U.S. __, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), applies to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B). Subsequently, the Supreme Court decided Sessions v. Dimaya, 584 U.S. __, 138 S. Ct. 1204 (2018), and we held this appeal pending our en banc decision in Ovalles v. United States (“Ovalles II”), 905 F.3d 1231 (11th Cir. 2018) (en banc). After review, we affirm. I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY A. Convictions, Direct Appeal, and First § 2255 Motion In 2008, a federal grand jury charged Solomon with: (1) one count of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951(a) (Count 1); (2) one count of conspiracy to use and carry a firearm during and in relation to, and to possess a firearm in furtherance of, the Hobbs Act conspiracy charged in Count 1, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) and (o) (Count 2); (3) 17 substantive counts of Hobbs Act robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1951(a) and 2 (Counts 3, 5, 7, 9 11, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29, 31, 33, and 35); and (4) 17 substantive counts of carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 924(c)(1) and 2 (Counts 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 34, and 36). Each of the substantive § 924(c) counts was predicated on the preceding substantive Hobbs Act robbery 2 Case: 17-14830 Date Filed: 01/08/2019 Page: 3 of 13 count. For example, Count 3 charged Solomon with the December 11, 2007 robbery of a Papa John’s Pizza employee, and Count 4 correspondingly charged him with carrying a firearm during and in relation to that robbery. All in all, the indictment charged that from December 2007 through late March 2008, Solomon used a firearm to rob a variety of restaurants, including several pizza places and Chinese food restaurants and multiple Subway locations. Solomon pled not guilty and proceeded to trial. In 2009, following a 10-day trial, the jury found Solomon guilty on all but two of the charged counts, Counts 23 and 24. Thus, Solomon was convicted of: (1) one count of conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery; (2) one ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals