Johnson v. United States of America
Filing
2
MEMORANDUM - The instant motion is a second or successive motion which cannot be reviewed by this Court. 28 U.S.C. ' 2255(h) provides that a second or successive motion must be certified by a panel of the court of appeals as containing either n ewly discovered evidence or a new rule of constitutional law made retroactive on collateral review. In the instant case, Johnson has not obtained the requisite certification from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals. Therefore, this Court lacks authority under 2255 to grant the requested relief, and the motion will be dismissed. A separate order of dismissal will accompany this Memorandum. Signed by District Judge Carol E. Jackson on 3/19/14. (KJS)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
EASTERN DIVISION
LEON JOHNSON,
)
)
Movant,
)
)
v.
)
Case No. 4:14CV262 CEJ
)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
)
)
Respondent.
)
MEMORANDUM
This matter is before the Court on the motion of Leon Johnson to vacate, set
aside or correct sentence brought pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
The United States
has not been ordered to respond.
On April 17, 2006, Johnson pled guilty to possession of cocaine with intent to
distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). Based on Johnson’s status as a
career
offender,
the
guideline
imprisonment
range
was
151-188
months’
imprisonment.
On July 31, 2006, Johnson was sentenced to a term of imprisonment
of 155 months.
He did not appeal the judgment.
On July 26, 2007, Johnson filed his
first motion to vacate pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
4:07CV1352 CEJ (E.D. Mo. 2010).
See Johnson v. U.S.,
This Court denied the motion, and the United
States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied movant=s application for a
certificate of appealability on December 13, 2010.
Johnson v. United States, No.
10-3346 (8th Cir. 2010).
In the instant motion, movant claims that he was denied effective assistance of
counsel, particularly with regard to counsel’s failure to file a direct appeal.
Movant
seeks an evidentiary hearing on this claim.
The instant motion is a second or successive motion which cannot be reviewed
by this Court.
28 U.S.C. ' 2255(h) provides that a second or successive motion
must be certified by a panel of the court of appeals as containing either newly
discovered evidence or a new rule of constitutional law made retroactive on collateral
review.
In the instant case, Johnson has not obtained the requisite certification from
the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.
2255 to grant the
Therefore, this Court lacks authority under '
requested relief, and the motion will be dismissed.
A separate order of dismissal will accompany this Memorandum .
Dated this 19th day of March, 2014.
CAROL E. JACKSON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
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?