James Chaplin v. Deborah Hickey, et al.

FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
FEB 15, 2012
JOHN LEY
CLERK
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 10-12022
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 2:09-cv-00114-LGW-JEG
JAMES CHAPLIN,
lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner-Appellant,
versus
DEBORAH A. HICKEY, Warden,
ATTORNEY GENERAL ERIC HOLDER, JR.,
lllllllllllllllllllllRespondents-Appellees.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Georgia
________________________
(February 15, 2012)
Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and BLACK, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

-- 1 of 2 --

James Chaplin, a counseled federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s
order dismissing his petition for writ of habeas corpus, under 28 U.S.C. § 2241,
for failure to state a claim. His claim is that he was wrongly sentenced under the
Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(1), because of an escape
conviction that Begay v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 1581 (2008), and Chambers v.
United States, 129 S. Ct. 687 (2009), make clear is not a “violent felony” within
the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 924(e)(2)(B), and that as a result of the error he was
sentenced to a term of imprisonment beyond the statutory maximum applicable to
his crime. Our decision in Gilbert v. United States, 640 F.3d 1293 (11th Cir.
2010), did not decide that issue. See id. at 1295, 1306–07, 1312, 1316, 1319 n.20,
1323. The Government concedes that Chaplin’s allegations, if true, do state a
claim.
We exercise our discretion to accept in this case the Government’s
concession that Chaplin may present his claim in a § 2241 petition, and we remand
to the district court for further proceedings on the merits of Chaplin’s habeas claim
to determine if the allegations of his petition are true.
VACATED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
2

-- 2 of 2 --