US v. Al-Lain Norman

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Originating case number: 2:08-cr-00034-RGD-FBS-1 Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [999445534]. Mailed to: Al-Lain Norman. [14-7088]

Appeal: 14-7088

Doc: 5

Filed: 09/30/2014

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7088

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
AL-LAIN DELONT NORMAN,
Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia, at Norfolk.
Robert G. Doumar, Senior
District Judge. (2:08-cr-00034-RGD-FBS-1)

Submitted:

September 25, 2014

Decided:

September 30, 2014

Before WILKINSON and AGEE, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior
Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Al-Lain Delont Norman, Appellant Pro Se.
Damion J. Hansen,
Special
Assistant
United
States
Attorney,
Kevin
Michael
Comstock, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, Virginia,
for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 14-7088

Doc: 5

Filed: 09/30/2014

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Al-Lain

Delont

Norman

appeals

the

district

court’s

order denying his motion to preserve his right to challenge his
sentence under Alleyne v United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013).
Because

Norman

previously

filed

a

28

U.S.C.

§ 2255

(2012)

motion, we conclude that the district court properly determined
that it lacked the authority to grant his request.
first

obtain

authorization

from

this

court

Norman must

before

raising

“second or successive” collateral attack on his sentence.

a
28

U.S.C. § 2255(h); United States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 205
(4th Cir. 2003).
judgment.
legal
before

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

contentions
this

court

are

adequately

and

argument

presented

would

not

in
aid

the
the

materials
decisional

process.

AFFIRMED

2