Snoddy v. United States of America

Filing 7

MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by Judge James H Hancock on 5/14/2014. (JLC)

FILED
2014 May-14 AM 11:07
U.S. DISTRICT COURT
N.D. OF ALABAMA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION

DAVID DEWAYNE SNODDY,

)

Movant/Defendant,

)

v.

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

)

Respondent.

2:14-cv-8016-JHH

)

MEMORANDUM OPINION
The court has before it the April 7, 2014 Motion (Doc. #1) to Vacate, Set
Aside, or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 filed by David Dewayne
Snoddy. Pursuant to the court’s April 11, 2014 order (Doc. #2), the United States
Government filed a Response, arguing that the Motion should be dismissed in its
entirety as untimely and successive. (Doc. #4.) Snoddy filed a Response (Doc. # 6)
to the Government’s arguments on May 13, 2014. The Motion (Doc. #1) to Vacate
is now under submission and due to be denied.
The first reason the Motion (Doc. #1) is due to be denied is because it is his
second motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. His first motion was filed on October
14, 2008, and that motion was dismissed with prejudice on May 14, 2008. (See 2:08-

cv-8044-JHH-PWG.) Snoddy filed the instant motion (which is word-for-word
identical to the one filed in 2008) on April 7, 2014.
The law is clear that a successive motion pursuant to § 2255 may not be
reviewed by this court unless the defendant first obtains permission – a certificate of
appealability – from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals to file the same. 28
U.S.C. § 2255(h); 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A); Jackson v. Crosby, 437 F.3d 1290,
1294-95 (11th Cir. 2006). Although it seems that Snoddy has filed a motion with the
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals seeking permission to present a second habeas,
there is nothing before the court to show that it has been granted.

As such, the

court’s hands are tied, and it cannot consider the present motion. Because Snoddy
has not satisfied this requirement, the court is without jurisdiction to entertain his
successive § 2255 motion, and the Motion to Vacate (Doc. # 1) is due to be denied.
A separate order will be entered dismissing this action without prejudice. The
Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this order to the Movant and the United States
Attorney for the Northern District of Alabama.
DONE this the

14th

day of May, 2014.

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2