Reynolds v. United States Of America
Filing
15
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER granting 11 Motion for Summary Judgment (Signed by Judge Sim Lake) Parties notified. (aboyd, 4)
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
December 10, 2015
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
LAUREN E. REYNOLDS,
Register No. 86893-180,
David J. Bradley, Clerk
§
§
§
§
Petitioner,
CIVIL ACTION NO. H-15-2450
§
§
§
§
§
§
v.
MARNE BOYLE, Warden,
Respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Petitioner, Lauren E. Reynolds, has filed a Petition for Writ
of Habeas Corpus Pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
(Docket Entry No.
1).
§
2241 By Pro Se Petitioner
The United States has filed a Motion for
Summary Judgment (Docket Entry No. 11), to which Reynolds has filed
a "Traverse in Reply"
(Docket Entry No. 14).
The summary judgment
evidence establishes the following facts.
On August 31,
prison
by
the
2010, Reynolds was sentenced to 120 months in
United
States
District
Court
for
the
Northern
District of Texas for felon in possession of a firearm in violation
of 18
u.s.c.
§
922(g).
When she committed the
§
922(g) violation
Reynolds was on supervised release from a previous drug conviction
in the Western District of Texas.
The supervised release petition
was transferred to the Northern District of Texas, which revoked
Reynolds'
supervised
release
and
sentenced
her
to
a
24 -month
sentence to be served consecutively with her
922(g)
§
sentence.
Reynolds appealed both sentences, and both sentences were affirmed
by the Fifth Circuit on June 3, 2011, in a consolidated appeal.
Reynolds then filed a motion under 28 U.S.C.
§
2255 to vacate
both sentences, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.
Northern District of Texas denied her
§
The
2255 motion on April 5,
2012; and the Fifth Circuit dismissed her appeal on June 28, 2012,
for
want
of
prosecution.
Reynolds
then petitioned
Circuit for permission to file a successive
§
the
Fifth
2255 motion.
Fifth Circuit denied the motion on July 22, 2015.
The
While the Fifth
Circuit was considering her motion, Reynolds filed a second
§
2255
motion in the Northern District of Texas.
On April 22, 2015, the
Northern
motion
District
jurisdiction as a
dismissed
successive
Reynolds'
§
2255 motion.
before the Fifth Circuit and her successive
§
for
lack
Reynolds'
of
motion
2255 motion filed in
the Northern District of Texas argued that she was innocent of the
§
922(g)
conviction, that she should have received a three-level
reduction for acceptance of responsibility, and that her sentences
should not have been imposed to run consecutively.
the first two of these claims in her pending
§
Reynolds raises
2241 motion.
Because Reynolds is attacking the validity of her federal
sentence,
§
not the manner in which the sentence was executed,
a
2255 motion is the proper means of collaterally attacking her
federal sentence.
Pack v.
Yusuff,
Tolliver v. Dobre, 211 F.3d 876 (5th Cir. 2000),
218 F.3d 448
(5th Cir.
-2-
2000).
In certain rare
situations a
2241 petition attacking a federal sentence may be
§
considered if the petitioner can establish that the remedy under
§
2255 is inadequate or ineffective.
meet AEDPA's
§
2255
Reynolds
§
'second or successive'
inadequate or ineffective.
has
shown no
basis
for
However,
"the inability to
requirement,
Tolliver,
attacking
does not make
211
her
F.3d at 878.
sentence
under
2241.
Because Reynolds has not shown that she is entitled to relief
under 28 U.S.C.
§
2241,
the United States'
Motion for Summary
Judgment (Docket Entry No. 11) is GRANTED.
SIGNED at Houston, Texas, on this lOth day of December, 2015.
SIM LAKE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
-3-
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?