Matches in SCALES for { <http://schemas.scales-okn.org/rdf/scales#/DocketEntry/ilnd;;1:15-cv-08669_de5> ?p ?o ?g. }
Showing items 1 to 5 of
5
with 100 items per page.
- ilnd;;1:15-cv-08669_de5 RegisterActionDate "2015-12-09" @default.
- ilnd;;1:15-cv-08669_de5 RegisterActionDescriptionText "MINUTE entry before the Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Defendant's motion under 28 U.S.C. section 2255 to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence 1 is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Defendant filed a motion under section 2255 on July 12, 2005 in case no. 05 C 4011 [Dkt. # 1 ], which was denied by the district court. Because no new judgment has been entered, the instant motion is successive. See Magwood v. Patterson, 561 U.S. 320, 339 (2010) (stating defendant's section 2255 motion would not be successive if it were his "first application challenging [an] intervening judgment") (emphasis in original). Cf. White v. United States, 745 F.3d 834, 836 (7th Cir. 2014) (holding that § 2255 motion was successive because defendant collaterally attacked a sentence reduction proceeding and not a resentencing). "A petitioner is required to seek authorization from the court of appeals to file a 'second or successive' section 2255 motion." See Kramer v. United States, 797 F.3d 493, 498 (7th Cir. 2015) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 2255, 8). Because Defendant did not receive such permission, the Court dismisses the case for lack of jurisdiction. Id. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice (cjg, ) (Entered: 12/09/2015)" @default.
- ilnd;;1:15-cv-08669_de5 AdministrativeID "5" @default.
- ilnd;;1:15-cv-08669_de5 OntologyLabel minute_entry @default.
- ilnd;;1:15-cv-08669_de5 hasReferenceToOtherEntry ilnd;;1:15-cv-08669_de0 @default.