Williams v. United States of America
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant's motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence is DENIED AND DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall not issue a Certificate of Appealability. Signed by District Judge Henry E. Autrey on 10/5/12. (TRC)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Case No. 4:12CV1441 HEA
OPINION, MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on movant’s motion to vacate, set aside or
correct sentence. The motion is a “second or successive motion” within the meaning
of 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244 & 2255 but has not been certified by the United States Court
of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit as required by the AEDPA. As a result, the motion
will be denied and dismissed.
In 1993, movant pled not guilty to one count of kidnaping. Following a jury
trial, movant was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. Movant appealed
his conviction to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Movant indicates that after appealing his conviction to the Eighth Circuit, he
filed a motion to vacate with the instant Court, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
Williams v. United States, 4:05CV1089 HEA (E.D. Mo.). Movant’s motion to vacate
was denied and dismissed by this Court on August 8, 2005 as time-barred. Movant
appealed the denial of his motion to vacate to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals,
and his appeal was denied and dismissed. He filed a petition for writ of certiorari
with the United States Supreme Court, but his petition for writ was also denied.
In the instant motion, movant claims that he is actually innocent of the crime
for which he was convicted. He additionally claims that there were Batson violations
present during voir dire at his criminal trial. He further claims that he was denied due
process when a life sentence was imposed without a jury recommendation. Movant
insists that many of these grounds were not previously raised due to ineffective
assistance of counsel.
Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255:
A second or successive motion must be certified as provided in section 2244
by a panel of the appropriate court of appeals to contain-(1) newly discovered evidence that, if proven and viewed in light of the
evidence as a whole, would be sufficient to establish by clear and
convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the
movant guilty of the offense . . .
Absent certification from the United States Court of Appeals, this Court lacks
authority under § 2255 to grant movant’s requested relief. As a result, the motion
shall be dismissed.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that movant’s motion to vacate, set aside or
correct sentence is DENIED AND DISMISSED.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Court shall not issue a Certificate of
Dated this 5th day of October, 2012.
HENRY EDWARD AUTREY
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?