WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to weigh in on a federal prisoner’s request to overturn his robbery conviction and 24-year prison sentence.
Michael Bowe admitted to his involvement in a 2008 robbery in West Palm Beach, Florida, and pleaded guilty to three counts: conspiracy to commit a Hobbs Act robbery, attempt to commit a Hobbs Act robbery and using a firearm in relation to a crime of violence. He was sentenced to 288 months in prison in 2009.
In a pro se petition calling his conviction unconstitutional, Bowe argued that he wrongfully received a sentencing enhancement for the attempted use of a firearm on the second count of attempt to commit robbery, which added 10 years to his sentence.
The argument, which failed to sway lower federal courts, fell short at the high court, too.
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote a statement respecting the court's decision to deny Bowe’s petition.
Sotomayor, a Barack Obama appointee, noted that there seems to be a split among U.S. circuit courts — an issue that Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Donald Trump appointee, had expressed a desire to resolve. Sotomayor wishes to address the issue as well, she wrote.
“There is a reason, however, that this is the first case to reach the court presenting this question since [Kavanuagh] welcomed petitions on the split in Avery v. United States,” Sotomayor wrote.
She explained that such petitions cannot reach the Supreme Court from either group of appellate courts.
A key piece of Bowe’s challenge hinged on U.S. Code § 2244, which allows U.S. circuit and district court judges to dismiss a writ of habeas corpus if a previous judge has already ruled on a prior claim. A second habeas application can be denied under §2254, a statute that governs state prisoners seeking federal post-conviction relief.
Bowe raised the question whether §2244 also applies to claims from federal prisoners like him, whose challenges are governed by §2255.
The process in the three circuits who have interpreted §2244 to only apply to state prisoners would require an appeals court to certify a challenge, then remand to the district court to decide on the merits.
In the six circuits that apply the statute to both state and federal prisoners, the court would deny any successive motions, and either party would be unable to seek review from the Supreme Court, according to a separate statute barring certiorari petitions stemming from successive challenges.
In Bowe’s case, Sotomayor wrote, it is unlikely he met the standard for the high court’s consideration of an original habeas petition, as it is unclear the Eleventh Circuit would have certified his challenge even without §2244 blocking it.
“The circuit split, however, is still an important issue for this court to consider in a more appropriate case,” Sotomayor said. “I would welcome the invocation of this court’s original habeas jurisdiction in a future case where the petitioner may have meritorious §2255 claims.”
In the meantime, Sotomayor said, appeals courts should reconsider this question in en banc hearings, when possible.
During the robbery Bowe and three others shot at two armored van guards as they refilled an ATM, according to reporting at the time by the Sun Sentinel. The group drove up beside the guards then fired at them with an assault rifle, wounding the guards with non-life-threatening injuries.
Bowe filed his initial challenge to throw out his conviction in 2016, which was denied by the district court judge. He filed again in 2019, arguing that the statute covering the gun charge was unconstitutionally vague and therefore could not stand. The Eleventh Circuit denied that challenge.
In 2022, Bowe tried again, citing the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Taylor — which determined an attempted Hobbs Act robbery doesn’t qualify as a crime of violence — as grounds to overturn his sentence.
The appeals court denied him and a request for an en banc hearing before the full bench, leading Bowe to raise the issue to the Supreme Court.
Follow @Ryan_Knappy
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
