When a Johnson petitioner would not be an armed career criminal if sentenced today, is it right to endorse the Tenth Circuit's "relevant legal background" analysis which blatantly ignores controlling law or should a court focus instead on a showing that the sentence was possibly predicated on a residual clause that is now unconstitutional as is done in the Fourth and Ninth Circuits?

Whether a commercial burglary conviction under New Mexico law categorically does not qualify as a violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act's enumerated offense clause