Campbell v. United States of America

Filing 4

ORDER dismissing Petitioner's 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) filed by Kevin Campbell. Signed by U.S. District Judge John C Coughenour. (PM) cc: petitioner via first class mail

THE HONORABLE JOHN C. COUGHENOUR

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON
AT SEATTLE

7
8
9

KEVIN CAMPBELL,

10
Petitioner,
11
12

CASE NO. C18-0274-JCC
ORDER

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
13
Respondent.
14
15

This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner Kevin Campbell’s second motion to

16 vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Dkt. No. 1). For the
17 reasons set forth herein, the Court DISMISSES the motion with prejudice.
18

A prisoner normally has only one opportunity to file a habeas petition. See United States

19 v. Lopez, 577 F.3d 1053, 1055 (9th Cir. 2009). The only exception is when the Court of Appeals
20 certifies that a second or successive motion contains:
21
22
23
24
25
26

(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; or
(2) a new rule of constitutional law, made retroactive to cases on collateral
review by the Supreme Court, that was previously unavailable.
28 U.S.C. § 2255(h). Before a petitioner can file a second or successive habeas petition in the
district court, the petitioner must move in the Court of Appeals for certification. 28 U.S.C.

ORDER
C18-0274-JCC
PAGE - 1

1 § 2244(b)(3)(A). This requirement is jurisdictional; without certification, the district court lacks
2 the authority to hear a second petition. Lopez, 577 F.3d at 1061.
3

Petitioner has already filed a habeas petition, which this Court denied. See United States

4 v. Campbell, C17-0025-JCC, Dkt. Nos. 51, 60 (W.D. Wash. 2017) (the Court treated Petitioner’s
5 motion to withdraw his guilty plea after he was sentenced and judgment was issued as a petition
6 brought pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2255). Petitioner has made no showing that he moved for
7 certification under § 2244 for the current petition or that he obtained such certification. Nor does
8 the Court expect such certification could be issued, as Petitioner raises the same argument in the
9 current successive petition as in his previous petition. Accordingly, this Court lacks the authority
10 to consider the present petition.
11

Petitioner’s § 2255 petition (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED with prejudice. The Clerk is

12 directed to CLOSE this case and send a copy of this order to Petitioner.
13

DATED this 22nd day of March 2018.

14
15
16

A

17
18
19

John C. Coughenour
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20
21
22
23
24
25
26
ORDER
C18-0274-JCC
PAGE - 2