UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
IN RE: Johnson v. United States, ) Chief Judge Thomas A. Varlan
— U.S. —, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). ) SO-16-02
STANDING ORDER
In Johnson v. United States, the Supreme Court concluded that the Armed Career
Criminal Act’s (“ACCA) residual clause is void for vagueness. — U.S. —, 135 S. Ct.
2551 (2015). Shortly thereafter, the Sixth Circuit issued its decision in In re Watkins. —
F.3d —, 2015 WL 9241176 (2015). There, the petitioner requested permission to file a
second or successive habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, seeking to base her
collateral attack on the ruling in Johnson. The Sixth Circuit determined that the
petitioner made a prima facie showing that the challenge to her ACCA sentence was
based on “a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral review
by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable” and granted her motion for
authorization to file a second or successive § 2255 petition.
Due to the number of defendants who may be affected by Johnson and the
potential sentencing implications for these defendants, and the need to efficiently process
habeas petitions, this Court APPOINTS Federal Defender Services of Eastern Tennessee
(“FDS”) to represent any defendant who seeks relief under § 2255 in light of Johnson,
unless the defendant has retained counsel or the previously appointed CJA attorney
desires to represent the defendant. 18 U.S.C. § 3006A. FDS shall identify defendants
with a claim for relief under Johnson and represent such defendants in seeking relief.
FDS shall identify any conflicts of interest and notify the Court so new counsel may be
appointed. Any defendant who was not previously represented by FDS or a CJA attorney
will need to complete an in forma pauperis application and file the application with the
Court.
The Court AUTHORIZES the United States Probation Office to disclose relevant
information to FDS, including Presentence Investigation Reports, Statements of Reason,
and the identities of any defendants it has identified as being affected by Johnson. The
Probation Office, FDS, and the United States Attorney’s Office are encouraged to assist
the Court in identifying those cases deserving of priority treatment, i.e., those cases
where a defendant’s release date is near.
In addition, for any § 2255 motion based upon Johnson filed on or after the
effective date of this standing order, the United States SHALL file a response and the
response shall be filed within thirty (30) days of the filing of the motion.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
ENTERED BY THE COURT February 11, 2016.
s/ Thomas A. Varlan
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
