Burnett Godbee v. USA

[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 16-17211
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket Nos. 0:15-cv-61860-WJZ; 0:13-cr-60167-WJZ-2
BURNETT GODBEE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(February 14, 2018)
Before WILSON, JORDAN and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 16-17211 Date Filed: 02/14/2018 Page: 1 of 2

-- 1 of 2 --

2
Burnett Godbee appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255
motion to vacate his sentence for conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery,
18 U.S.C. § 1951, attempted Hobbs Act robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 1951, discharge of a
firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(ii), and
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). Godbee
contends Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), invalidated 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(c)(3)(B), and his convictions for Hobbs Act robbery and conspiracy to
commit Hobbs Act robbery do not otherwise qualify as crimes of violence under
§ 924(c)(3)(A).
When we granted Godbee a certificate of appealability on whether
Johnson’s void-for-vagueness ruling extends to § 924(c)(3)(B), we had not yet
addressed the issue. We have, however, since concluded that Johnson’s void-for-
vagueness ruling does not extend to § 924(c)(3)(B). See Ovalles v. United States,
861 F.3d 1257 (11th Cir. 2017). Godbee’s claim is foreclosed by Ovalles.
Therefore, the denial of his § 2255 motion is
AFFIRMED.
Case: 16-17211 Date Filed: 02/14/2018 Page: 2 of 2

-- 2 of 2 --