⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit hears arguments in United States versus Senegal. The defendant was sentenced in 2008 under the Armed Career Criminal Act, which imposes a fifteen-year mandatory minimum when a felon in possession of a firearm has three prior convictions for violent felonies or serious drug offenses. The statute defined those predicates partly through a residual clause that swept in crimes posing serious potential risk of physical injury. In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down that clause as unconstitutionally vague. Mr. Senegal was sentenced on eight counts, including two consecutive life terms, and the two felon-in-possession counts appear to have relied on the now-invalid residual clause. He moved to vacate his sentence; the district court denied the motion, and he appealed. This court initially affirmed in 2022, but the case has returned for argument after further developments in the law bearing on whether the error was harmless. The government defends the judgment on several grounds. It argues Mr. Senegal procedurally defaulted his claim by not raising it earlier; the defense responds that the government waived that defense by not raising it in the district court. The government also invokes the concurrent-sentence doctrine, arguing that review is pointless where undisturbed consecutive sentences would dictate the same total term. The defense argues the sentencing-package doctrine calls for a complete resentencing, so the judge can reconsider the entire sentence in light of the constitutional error and the defendant's conduct over the past two decades.

United States v. Senegal (No. 19-40930) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 4, 2026.