MCREYNOLDS v. USA

Filing 3

ENTRY Dismissing Motion for Relief Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and Denying Certificate of Appealability - Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue. The Court denies a certificate of appealability. Signed by Judge Larry J. McKinney on 6/3/2014. (copy to Petitioner via US Mail) (JKS)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA
INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION
MARLON
EUGENE McREYNOLDS,
Petitioner,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Respondent.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 1:14-cv-822-LJM-DKL
IP 99-59-CR-03-M/F

Entry Dismissing Motion for Relief Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 2255 and Denying Certificate of Appealability
I. The ' 2255 Motion
A federal inmate seeking to set aside his conviction generally must do so under 28 U.S.C. §
2255. See Morales v. Bezy, 499 F.3d 668, 670 (7th Cir. 2007). Marlon McReynolds has traveled
that path with respect to his conviction for drug offenses in No. IP 99-59-CR-03-M/F. This
occurred in a proceeding assigned to the civil docket as No. 1:03-cv-1360-LJM-VSS, which was
dismissed with prejudice on April 21, 2004. This disposition was affirmed on appeal in
McReynolds v. United States, 397 F.3d 479, 481 (7th Cir. 2005).
A second or successive petition may only be considered by the sentencing court if the
petitioner seeks an order from the appropriate court of appeals authorizing the district court to
consider the application. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(3); see also 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h) (“A second or
successive motion must be certified as provided in section 2244 by a panel of the appropriate court
of appeals . . . .”). McReynolds has not claimed, and there is no indication, that he has obtained
leave from the Court of Appeals to file a second or successive such petition. When there has
already been a decision on the merits in a federal habeas action, to obtain another round of federal
collateral review a petitioner requires permission from the Court of Appeals under 28 U.S.C. '
2244(b). See Potts v. United States, 210 F.3d 770 (7th Cir. 2000).

Judgment consistent with this Entry shall now issue.
II. Certificate of Appealability
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 22(b), Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing
' 2254 proceedings, and 28 U.S.C. ' 2253(c), the court finds that McReynolds has failed to show
that reasonable jurists would find it Adebatable whether [this court] was correct in its procedural
ruling.@ Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). The court therefore denies a certificate of
appealability.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date:

06/03/2014

Distribution:
MARLON EUGENE MCREYNOLDS
06028-028
MARION U.S. PENITENTIARY
Inmate Mail/Parcels
P.O. BOX 1000
MARION, IL 62959

________________________________
LARRY J. McKINNEY, JUDGE
United States District Court
Southern District of Indiana