Case: 17-14807 Date Filed: 08/02/2019 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 17-14807
________________________
D.C. Docket Nos. 0:16-cv-61367-DMM; 0:13-cr-60006-DMM-1
JEAN EVANS ANTOINE,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida
________________________
(August 2, 2019)
Before WILLIAM PRYOR and NEWSOM, Circuit Judges, and VRATIL, * District
Judge.
*
Honorable Kathryn H. Vratil, United States District Judge for the District of Kansas, sitting by
designation.
Case: 17-14807 Date Filed: 08/02/2019 Page: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
Jean Antoine, a federal prisoner proceeding with counsel, appeals the district
court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, in which he argued that
Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015), invalidated his 18 U.S.C.
§ 924(c) conviction (predicated on a conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery
offense). The district court granted a certificate of appealability on the issue of
whether Johnson applies to § 924(c)(3)(B).
While his appeal was pending, the Supreme Court decided United States v.
Davis, in which it held that § 924(c)(3)’s residual clause is unconstitutionally
vague. 139 S. Ct. 2319, 2323, 2336 (2019). And we held in a published order that
Davis announced “a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on
collateral review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable,” 28
U.S.C. § 2255(h)(2). In re Hammoud, — F.3d —, No. 19-12458, slip op. at 4–8
(11th Cir. July 23, 2019). Because the district court didn’t have the benefit of
these decisions when adjudicating Antoine’s § 2255 motion, we vacate and remand
so that the district court may reconsider, in light of these new precedents, whether
Antoine is entitled to any § 2255 relief. In addition to the issues the parties have
raised up to now, the district court may wish to consider whether it makes sense to
permit Antoine to amend his motion in light of Davis. We express no opinion
about this or any other issue.
2
Case: 17-14807 Date Filed: 08/02/2019 Page: 3 of 3
VACATED AND REMANDED.
3
Jean Evans Antoine v. United States
Combined Opinion