Clarkwestern Dietrich Bldg. Sys., L.L.C. v. Certified Steel Stud Assn., Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• employing this approach to determine whether a crime would have been considered a “violent felony” under the Armed Career Criminal Act
• requiring defendant to “first obtain an order from the appropriate court of appeals authorizing the district court to consider the [successive] motion” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[W]e conduct a de novo review of a denial of a § 2255 motion when the district court did not hold an ev- identiary hearing.”
• “our review of a district court’s denial of a [Section] 2255 Johnson claim is de novo[,] unless the court conducted an evidentiary hearing from which it made findings”
• “[O]ur review of a district court’s denial of a § 2255 Johnson claim is de novo unless the court conducted an evidentiary hearing from which it made findings.”
• “The § 2255 movant bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that ‘it was use of the residual clause that led to the sentencing court's enhancement of his sentence.’” (citing Driscoll, 892 F.3d at 1135)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).