govinfo:USCOURTS-moed-4_14-cv-01019-1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI 
EASTERN DIVISION 
 
 
MARK EDWIN SHORES,    ) 
) 
Movant,   ) 
) 
v.     )  No.  4:14-CV-1019 (CEJ) 
) 
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,   ) 
) 
Respondent.   ) 
 
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 
 
This matter is before the Court  on the amended motion of Mark Edwin Shores 
to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2255.   
After a jury found Shores guilty of multiple controlled substances and firearms 
offenses, he was sentenced under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 
924(e), to a n aggregate  322-month term of imprisonment.  The judgment was 
affirmed on appeal.  United States v. Shores, 700 F.3d 366 (8th Cir. 2012), cert. denied, 
133 S.Ct. 2780 (2013). Shores’ status as an armed career criminal was premised on 
his two prior Michigan felony convictions for possession with intent to deliver cocaine 
and a Michigan felony conviction for assault with a dangerous weapon.  In the instant 
amended motion, Shores argues that in light of the decisi on in  Johnson v. United 
States, 135 S.Ct. 2551 (2015), assault with a dangerous weapon is no longer  a 
predicate offense that may be used to enhance a sentence under the ACCA. 
 In Johnson, the Supreme Court held that the “residual clause” of the ACCA , 
18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B)(ii), is unconstitutionally vague.  The ACCA enhances the 
punishment for firearms offenses under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g) when the defendant has 
at least three prior convictions for a serious drug offense or a “violent felony.”  The 
Case: 4:14-cv-01019-MTS     Doc. #:  31     Filed: 05/16/17     Page: 1 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>
2 
 
term “violent felony” is defined in the ACCA as felony offense that “(1) has as an 
element the use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the 
person of another, or (ii) is burglary, arson, or extortion, involves the use of 
explosives, or otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of 
physical injury to another.”  18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B) (emphasis added).  The 
“otherwise involves” language of the ACCA is the residual clause that the Supreme 
Court found unconstitutional. Johnson, 135 S.Ct. at 2563. 
Shores requested and was granted additional time to file a supplemental brief 
in support of his amended motion.  However, no supplemental brief was filed.  
Shores has not cited the Michigan statute on which his assault conviction w as based 
nor has he submitted any documents pertaining to the court proceedings .  
Consequently, the Court cannot determine whether the  offense of conviction “has as 
an element t he use, attempted use, or threatened use of physical force against the 
person of another” and is therefore a violent felony under § 924(e)(2)(B)(i). Because 
Shores has failed to demonstrate that he should no long be classified as an armed 
career criminal, he is not entitled to relief under Johnson.   
Accordingly, 
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the amended motion of Mark Edwin Shores to 
vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ' 2255 [Doc. # 24]  is 
denied. 
 
    __________________________ 
CAROL E. JACKSON 
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
 
Dated this 16th day of May, 2017. 
Case: 4:14-cv-01019-MTS     Doc. #:  31     Filed: 05/16/17     Page: 2 of 2 PageID #:
<pageID>

Passage view · GavelSight