Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr. v. United States ( 2018 )


Menu:
  •                   United States Court of Appeals
    For the Eighth Circuit
    ___________________________
    No. 16-4428
    ___________________________
    Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr.
    lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner - Appellant
    v.
    United States of America
    lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent - Appellee
    ____________
    Appeal from United States District Court
    for the District of North Dakota - Bismarck
    ____________
    Submitted: February 22, 2018
    Filed: February 23, 2018
    [Unpublished]
    ____________
    Before GRUENDER, MURPHY, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.
    ____________
    PER CURIAM.
    Samuel Bryce Silk, Jr. appeals the district court’s denial of his motion for relief
    under 
    28 U.S.C. § 2255
     after it sua sponte enforced a collateral review waiver in his
    plea agreement. Silk’s motion raises one claim: that he could not, as a matter of law,
    have committed the crime to which he pleaded guilty, domestic assault as a habitual
    offender, in violation of 
    18 U.S.C. § 117
    .
    Upon de novo review, we conclude that the collateral review waiver is
    unenforceable because, during the plea hearing, the district court neither informed
    Silk of the terms of the waiver, nor determined that he understood its terms. See Fed.
    R. Crim. P. 11(b)(1)(N); United States v. Boneshirt, 
    662 F.3d 509
    , 516 (8th Cir.
    2011). We therefore vacate the denial of Silk’s § 2255 motion, and remand the case
    to the district court for further consideration. We leave for the district court to
    determine in the first instance: (1) whether any other procedural hurdles preclude
    consideration of Silk’s claim on the merits; and (2) if not, whether Silk had at least
    two prior qualifying convictions that were “final” on July 12, 2014, when the events
    underlying this case occurred. See 
    18 U.S.C. § 117
    (a)(1) (requiring, as relevant, that
    a defendant’s prior convictions be both “final” and “against a spouse or intimate
    partner”); see also United States v. Wroblewski, 
    816 F.3d 1021
    , 1024–25 (8th Cir.
    2016); United States v. Frook, 
    616 F.3d 773
    , 774–76 (8th Cir. 2006). Finally, we
    note that Silk attacks the validity of his conviction, and his currently scheduled
    release date is May 11, 2018. We are confident the district court will act
    expeditiously.
    Mandate to issue forthwith.
    ______________________________
    -2-
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 16-4428

Judges: Gruender, Murphy, Kelly

Filed Date: 2/23/2018

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 11/6/2024