U.S. v. Sessoms, 7:06-CR-63-BR. (2018)
Court: District Court, E.D. North Carolina
Number: infdco20181003g22
Visitors: 1
Filed: Oct. 02, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 02, 2018
Summary: ORDER W. EARL BRITT , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's motion for review of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3742 and for appointment of counsel. (DE # 130.) Because 3742 pertains to review of a sentence on appeal from the district court to the court of appeals and defendant suggests that his sentence violates the terms of his plea agreement, the court construes defendant's challenge to his sentence as one under 28 U.S.C. 2255. See United State
Summary: ORDER W. EARL BRITT , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's motion for review of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3742 and for appointment of counsel. (DE # 130.) Because 3742 pertains to review of a sentence on appeal from the district court to the court of appeals and defendant suggests that his sentence violates the terms of his plea agreement, the court construes defendant's challenge to his sentence as one under 28 U.S.C. 2255. See United States..
More
ORDER
W. EARL BRITT, Senior District Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's motion for review of his sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and for appointment of counsel. (DE # 130.) Because § 3742 pertains to review of a sentence on appeal from the district court to the court of appeals and defendant suggests that his sentence violates the terms of his plea agreement, the court construes defendant's challenge to his sentence as one under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See United States v. Crump, No. 7:06CR00007-1, 2017 WL 4707025, at *1 (W.D. Va. Oct. 19, 2017) (where the defendant alleged he was improperly sentenced under the career offender guideline, the court construed a § 3742 motion as a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion). Because defendant has previously filed a § 2255 motion, defendant must first seek authorization from the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals before this court can consider the motion. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244(b), 2255(h). The motion is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. The court finds that defendant has not made "a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right," 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2), and therefore, a certificate of appealability is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
