Napier v. United States of America

Filing 97

ORDER Re Petitioner's 95 Motion to Vacate the October 27, 2011 Order re Petitioner's Request for Reconsideration Re Disposition of Firearms signed by District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill on 12/6/2011. (Sant Agata, S)

1
2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

3

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

4
5

DENNIS NAPIER,

6
7
8
9

Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

1:10-cv-00040 LJO GSA
ORDER RE PETITIONER’S MOTION TO
VACATE THE OCTOBER 27, 2011 ORDER
RE PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR
RECONSIDERATION RE DISPOSITION OF
FIREARMS (DOC. 95)

Respondent.

10
11

Before the Court for decision is Petitioner Dennis Napier’s motion to vacate this Court’s

12

October 27, 2011 Order, which addressed Petitioner’s prior request for reconsideration regarding

13

disposition of firearms seized from Mr. Napeir’s residence. See Doc. 95. The October 27, 2011

14

Order confirmed a September 30, 2011 Order allowing certain firearms to be destroyed and others

15

to be sold at auction with proceeds remitting to Mr. Napier, but stayed destruction or sale until

16

November 27, 2011 to permit Mr. Napier one last opportunity to appeal. Docs. 93 & 94.

17
18
19

The procedural history of this case has been detailed in numerous prior orders, including
the September 30, 2011 Order and the October 27, 2011 Order Mr. Napier now seeks to vacate.

20

See Docs. 87 & 93. In sum, this Court determined that, because of a 1993 state conviction, Mr.

21

Napier is currently subject to a firearms prohibition, despite a 2003 Superior Court Order

22

purporting to reduce the 1993 conviction to a misdemeanor. Because the 2003 Superior Court

23
24

Order created some confusion over whether and to what extent the firearms prohibition continued
after 2003, the district court, acting pursuant to its equitable jurisdiction, sought to determine

25
26

whether it would be possible and/or appropriate for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,

27

and Explosives (“BATF”) to sell some or all of the seized firearms at auction with the proceeds

28

remitting to Mr. Napier. The district court analyzed both parties’ submissions on sale at auction
1

1

and issued a detailed decision regarding disposition of the firearms. See Doc. 87. At Mr.

2

Napier’s request, disposition was stayed until November 27, 2011 to allow Mr. Napier an

3

opportunity to file an appeal. See Docs. 93 & 94. The stay automatically expired on November

4
27, 2011. Id.
5
6

As of November 28, 2011, no notice of appeal has been filed, nor has Mr. Napier

7

indicated any steps have been taken to appeal the status of his 1993 conviction within the state

8

system. Instead, on November 28, 2010, Mr. Napier filed the instant motion to vacate, which is

9

actually a request for additional time to file an appeal in the California state court system.

10

Although the October 27, 2011 Order suggested that the most recent stay was specifically to

11

permit Mr. Napier to file an appeal with the Ninth Circuit from the September 30, 2011 Order re

12
13
14

disposition of the firearms, Mr. Napier has had ample time to take steps to address the status of
his 1993 conviction within the state system. In fact, the district court has previously entreated

15

Mr. Napier to do just that. Although Mr. Napier has shown the capacity to file numerous motions

16

for reconsideration in this case, he has failed to demonstrate any intent to take action to address

17

the underlying status of his 1993 conviction in a way that would relieve him from his firearm

18
19

prohibition. No more stays are warranted. The government may take action to dispose of the
seized firearms as set forth in the September 30, 2011 Order.

20
21

The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment for the United States and against Mr.

22

Napier and to close this case.

23

SO ORDERED
Dated: December 6, 2011

24

/s/ Lawrence J. O’Neill
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28
2