U.S. v. JACKSON, 3:10cr00033-1. (2016)
Court: District Court, W.D. Virginia
Number: infdco20160727i02
Visitors: 8
Filed: Jul. 26, 2016
Latest Update: Jul. 26, 2016
Summary: MEMORANDUMOPINION NORMAN K. MOON , District Judge . Antwan Lamar Jackson, a federal inmate proceeding pro se , filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255. Upon review of the motion and court records, however, I conclude that the current 2255 motion must be dismissed as an unauthorized, successive motion. Jackson challenges his sentence of life plus 120 months for murder and various drug and firearm offenses in connection with a drug distribut
Summary: MEMORANDUMOPINION NORMAN K. MOON , District Judge . Antwan Lamar Jackson, a federal inmate proceeding pro se , filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255. Upon review of the motion and court records, however, I conclude that the current 2255 motion must be dismissed as an unauthorized, successive motion. Jackson challenges his sentence of life plus 120 months for murder and various drug and firearm offenses in connection with a drug distributi..
More
MEMORANDUMOPINION
NORMAN K. MOON, District Judge.
Antwan Lamar Jackson, a federal inmate proceeding pro se, filed a motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Upon review of the motion and court records, however, I conclude that the current § 2255 motion must be dismissed as an unauthorized, successive motion.
Jackson challenges his sentence of life plus 120 months for murder and various drug and firearm offenses in connection with a drug distribution conspiracy. Court records indicate that Jackson previously filed a § 2255 motion regarding the same convictions and sentence, which I denied. See Docket Nos. 132, 152, and 153. I may consider a second or successive § 2255 motion only upon specific certification from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that the claims in the motion meet certain criteria. See § 2255(h). As Jackson has not submitted any evidence of having obtained certification from the Court of Appeals to file a second or successive § 2255 motion, I must dismiss the current action without prejudice.1
FootNotes
1. Jackson also filed a motion to stay the court's consideration of his § 2255 motion until such time that the United State Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled on his motion seeking authorization to file a second or successive § 2255 motion. The Court of Appeals recently denied Jackson's request and, therefore, his motion to stay is now moot. In re: Antwan Lamar Jackson, No. 16-9860 (4th Cir. July 21, 2016).
Source: Leagle
