USCA11 Case: 20-14465 Date Filed: 06/03/2022 Page: 1 of 2

[DO NOT PUBLISH] In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 20-14465 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________

DEVIN FABIAN COLLINS, Petitioner-Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent-Appellee.

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 8:20-cv-02278-SDM-JSS ____________________ USCA11 Case: 20-14465 Date Filed: 06/03/2022 Page: 2 of 2

2 Opinion of the Court 20-14465

Before NEWSOM, LUCK, and LAGOA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The district court denied Devin Collins’s first 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his 210-month sentence for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e) solely on the ground that Rehaif v. United States, 139 S. Ct. 2191 (2019)—which was decided while Collins’s direct appeal was still pending—doesn’t apply retroactively to initial § 2255 mo- tions. In Rehaif, the Supreme Court determined that for a § 922(g) offense, “the Government must prove both that the defendant knew he possessed a firearm and that he knew he belonged to the relevant category of persons barred from possessing a firearm.” Id. at 2200. Collins contends that the government never proved whether he knew the latter. In Seabrooks v. United States, we held that Rehaif “announced a new rule of substantive law that applies retroactively to . . . initial § 2255 motion[s].” 32 F.4th 1375, 1383 (11th Cir. 2022) (per curiam). Accordingly, we VACATE and REMAND to the district court to decide Collins’s § 2255 motion under Rehaif and/or other grounds the parties may raise on re- mand.