United States v. Anderson

United States District Court for the District of Columbia · 2025 · Criminal Law

Criminal LawCertificate of AppealabilitySection 2255Section 924(c)Armed Bank Robbery28 U.S.C. § 225528 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2)certificate of appealability

Facts

A grand jury charged Anderson with armed bank robbery, a Section 924(c) firearm offense predicated on the robbery charged in Count One, and felon-in-possession. He pleaded guilty to armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and (d), the Section 924(c) count, and the felon-in-possession count. In his Section 2255 proceedings, Anderson argued in part that federal armed bank robbery under Sections 2113(a) and (d) is not a crime of violence under Section 924(c)'s elements clause. The court had previously denied that claim, concluding that Section 2113(d) categorically requires the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force.

Issue

Whether Anderson was entitled to a certificate of appealability on his claim that federal armed bank robbery under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2113(a) and (d) is not a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A). Also, whether a certificate should issue on his challenges based on Maryland armed robbery under the ACCA and the Guidelines.

Rule

In a Section 2255 proceeding, a certificate of appealability may issue only if the applicant makes a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. The applicant need not show he will prevail on the merits; he must show that the issue is debatable among jurists of reason, could be resolved differently, or is adequate to deserve encouragement to proceed further.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Seattle, Devin Cross files a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion challenging his conviction. The district court denies relief, and Devin seeks a certificate of appealability on a constitutional claim that the judge believes is weak but acknowledges has divided lower courts and could be resolved differently on appeal.

Should the district court issue a certificate of appealability?

Explanation. A certificate of appealability may issue only if the applicant makes a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Under the majority opinion, that does not require likely success on the merits; it is enough that the issue is debatable among jurists of reason, could be resolved differently, or deserves encouragement to proceed further. Because the claim is acknowledged to be debatable, a certificate should issue. (Derived from United States v. Anderson (n.d.).)