Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Substantive rulingFiled Nov. 22, 2019

Baker v. United States

Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Docket
1:16-cv-04433
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCriminalSentencing
In one sentence

In Baker v. United States, Judge Engelmayer closed Baker’s post-conviction case after vacating a firearm conviction and resentencing him.

Who this affects

Jamar Baker received the relief sought: the court vacated his firearm conviction, resentenced him on the surviving Hobbs Act conspiracy count, and closed his related post-conviction case.

What happened

In Baker v. United States, Jamar Baker sought relief from his federal conviction under a post-conviction procedure. The opinion concerns his conviction for possessing a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence.

The court had previously sentenced Baker on a Hobbs Act conspiracy count and a firearm count. After a Supreme Court decision held that Hobbs Act conspiracy does not qualify as a crime of violence, the court vacated the firearm conviction and resentenced Baker on the remaining count.

Because Baker received the relief he sought, Judge Paul A. Engelmayer directed the Clerk of Court to close the post-conviction case.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Baker v. United States · No. 1:16-cv-04433
Judge
Paul Engelmayer
Date
Nov. 22, 2019

Background

Jamar Baker had been convicted in a related criminal case on Count One, charging conspiracy to interfere with commerce by robbery under the Hobbs Act, and Count Two, charging possession of a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. The opinion identifies the firearm charge as arising under 18 U.S.C. § 24(c), as written in the order.

On October 7, 2019, the court resentenced Baker on Count One. At the same hearing, it vacated his conviction on Count Two. The court explained that Count Two identified the Hobbs Act conspiracy as the crime of violence, and that the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Davis held that this type of conspiracy does not qualify as a crime of violence.

Ruling

The court stated that vacating Count Two and resentencing Baker on the surviving count gave him the relief sought in his related petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a procedure for challenging a federal sentence or conviction. The court therefore directed the Clerk of Court to close case 16 Civ. 4433 (PAE).

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.