United States v. Michael Lux
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
While on federal supervised release, Defendant Michael Harry Lux was convicted of felony false imprisonment in California state court, thereby violating the terms of his supervised release. He appeals from the sentence imposed on July 8, 2013, for that violation. The district court calculated Defendant’s advisory range under the Sentencing Guidelines by taking into ac count a determination that Defendant’s false imprisonment conviction was a conviction for a “crime of violence” under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.2(a)(2).
The Supreme Court of the United States decided Johnson v. United States, — U.S. -, 135 S.Ct. 2551 , 192 L.Ed.2d 569 (2015), while the appeal in this case was pending. There, the Court held that the residual clause of the definition of “violent felony” in the Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984, 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e)(2)(B), is unconstitutionally vague. The parties dispute the applicability of Johnson to the residual clause of the definition of “crime of violence” in § 4B1.2(a)(2) of the Sentencing Guidelines, but we cannot resolve that dispute here because this case is moot.
Defendant’s only argument as to why this case is not moot is that, if he commits another…