Enix v. United States

(1) Whether the residual clause of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B) is unconstitutionally vague; (2) whether conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery has as an element "the use ... of physical force against the person or property of another," 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A); and (3) whether the U.S. Court of Appeals fo the 11th Circuit"s rule that reasonable jurists could not debate an issue foreclosed by binding circuit precedent, even when a judge on the panel issued the binding precedent and subsequently stated that the panel"s decision may be erroneous, misapplies the standard articulated by the Supreme Court in Miller-El v. Cockrell and Buck v. Davis for determining whether a movant has made the threshold showing for a certificate of appealability.