As such, the question presented here is whether 21 U.S.C. § 851(e), which clearly applies at and during federal sentencing proceedings, usurps and supplants relief under federal habeas corpus and also applies at and during § 2255 post-conviction proceedings — asked differently, whether Mr. St. Preux is procedurally (as well as substantively) barred from seeking re-sentencing in federal court based on the statute of limitations in 21 U.S.C. § 851(e) even after successfully challenging one of his prior state convictions. See, eg. Arreola-Castillo v. United States, 889 F.3d 378, 384 (7" Cir. 2018) (asking and deciding whether a "district court erred by holding that § 851(e) bars an individual from reopening his federal sentence under § 2255 when the state convictions that enhanced the sentence have since been vacated").

This question has been answered differently by the courts below and there remains a circuit split as to whether the 5-year-limitations period at 21 U.S.C. § 851(e) does or does not apply in habeas corpus and post-conviction proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.

Whether 21 U.S.C. § 851(e) bars a defendant from seeking re-sentencing under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 after successfully challenging a prior state conviction that was used to enhance the federal sentence