Arthur M. Clawson v. United States

Good Law
52 F.3d 806·95 Daily Journal DAR 4892·1995 WL 225491·1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 8830·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2805
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 18, 199594-35148California1,734 words

Opinion

Opinion

Arthur Clawson appeals the district court’s denial of habeas relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on Clawson’s claim that his federal sentence under the then existing Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.CApp. § 1202 (1982 & Supp. Ill 1985) (repealed 1986), was improperly enhanced through use of a state conviction that later became nonfi-nal when his appeal from the state judgment was reopened, and was unconstitutionally obtained.

In 1966 Clawson was convicted of robbery in the Oregon courts. His appeal was abandoned by counsel.

In 1986, Clawson was convicted in federal court of possession of a firearm, in violation of the ACCA. The Oregon robbery conviction was one of three used to enhance his sentence. A constitutional challenge to the validity of the robbery conviction was rejected on appeal from his federal sentence. United States v. Clawson, 831 F.2d 909 (9th Cir.1987), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 923 , 109 S.Ct. 303 , 102 L.Ed.2d 323 (1988).

Clawson then sought relief in state court, and the Oregon Court of Appeals ordered Clawson’s original direct appeal reopened on the grounds that his counsel had abandoned the ease without the consent of his client and without filing an Anders…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.