Filed: Nov. 01, 2005
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-2315 _ Antonia Soberanis-Sagrero, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District v. * of Minnesota. * United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: October 25, 2005 Filed: November 1, 2005 _ Before ARNOLD, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Antonia Soberanis-Sagrero filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate Soberanis-Sagrero's sentence based on the Supreme Court’s d
Summary: United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT _ No. 05-2315 _ Antonia Soberanis-Sagrero, * * Appellant, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District v. * of Minnesota. * United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. * _ Submitted: October 25, 2005 Filed: November 1, 2005 _ Before ARNOLD, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. _ PER CURIAM. Antonia Soberanis-Sagrero filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate Soberanis-Sagrero's sentence based on the Supreme Court’s de..
More
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT
___________
No. 05-2315
___________
Antonia Soberanis-Sagrero, *
*
Appellant, * Appeal from the United States
* District Court for the District
v. * of Minnesota.
*
United States of America, * [UNPUBLISHED]
*
Appellee. *
___________
Submitted: October 25, 2005
Filed: November 1, 2005
___________
Before ARNOLD, FAGG, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
___________
PER CURIAM.
Antonia Soberanis-Sagrero filed a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate
Soberanis-Sagrero's sentence based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Blakely v.
Washington,
542 U.S. 296 (2004). The district court* denied relief, but granted a
certificate of appealability on whether Blakey, and now United States v. Booker,
125
S. Ct. 738 (2005), apply retroactively to cases on collateral review. The rule
announced in Booker does not apply to final criminal judgments on collateral review.
*
The Honorable John R. Tunheim, United States District Judge for the District
of Minnesota.
See Never Misses A Shot v. United States,
413 F.3d 781, 783-84 (8th Cir. 2005) (per
curiam). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See 8th Cir. R.
47B.
______________________________
-2-