Albert Pickett pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm and received an enhanced sentence under the Armed Career Criminal Act based on prior Florida convictions. After the Supreme Court invalidated the Act’s residual clause, Pickett sought relief under the federal sentence-correction statute, and the district court ruled that he no longer qualified for the enhancement. The Eleventh Circuit held that Pickett had not yet shown, under the later Beeman standard, that his sentence actually rested on the unconstitutional clause. But he had no reason to anticipate that heightened historical showing when the district court decided his motion, and the existing record did not reveal what clause the original sentencing judge had used. The court therefore vacated and remanded rather than denying relief outright. On remand, the district court was directed to determine whether Pickett could show that it was more likely than not that the sentencing court relied only on the residual clause.