Monti Bellamy v. Gio Ramirez

Filing

UNPUBLISHED PER CURIAM OPINION filed. Motion disposition in opinion--granting Motion to proceed in forma pauperis. [1000312432-2] Originating case number: 2:17-cv-01782-MGL. Copies to all parties and the district court/agency. [1000335019]. Mailed to: Monti N. Bellamy FCI WILLIAMSBURG FEDERAL CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION P. O. Box 340 Salters, SC 29590-0000. [18-6572]

Appeal: 18-6572

Doc: 8

Filed: 07/24/2018

Pg: 1 of 2

UNPUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-6572

MONTI N. BELLAMY,
Petitioner - Appellant,
v.
GIO RAMIREZ, Warden,
Respondent - Appellee,
and
FEDERAL BUREAU
GENERAL,

OF

PRISONS;

UNITED

STATES

ATTORNEY

Respondents.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at
Charleston. Mary G. Lewis, District Judge. (2:17-cv-01782-MGL)

Submitted: July 19, 2018

Before WILKINSON, MOTZ, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Monti N. Bellamy, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Decided: July 24, 2018

Appeal: 18-6572

Doc: 8

Filed: 07/24/2018

Pg: 2 of 2

PER CURIAM:
Monti N. Bellamy, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s orders adopting
the magistrate judge’s recommendation to dismiss his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2012) petition,
in which Bellamy sought to challenge his armed career criminal designation, and denying
Bellamy’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend judgment. We have reviewed
the record and find no reversible error. Specifically, Bellamy’s § 2241 petition was
predicated on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mathis v. United States, __ U.S. __, 136 S.
Ct. 2243 (2016). But this ruling has not been held to apply retroactively to cases on
collateral review, as is required to raise a sentencing challenge in a § 2241 petition. See
United States v. Wheeler, 886 F.3d 415, 428-29 (4th Cir. 2018) (holding that federal
prisoner may challenge his sentence in a § 2241 proceeding following a change in
substantive law that is retroactively applicable on collateral review, when “the sentence
now presents an error sufficiently grave to be deemed a fundamental defect”).
Accordingly, we grant Bellamy leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm the district
court’s orders. See Bellamy v. Ramirez, No. 2:17-cv-01782-MGL (D.S.C. Mar. 28 &
May 2, 2018). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions
are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid
the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

2