Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Knafel

United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Harrisonburg Division

October 7, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v.
JOSHUA SAMUEL KNAFEL, Petitioner.

2255 MEMORANDUM OPINION

MICHAEL F. URBANSKI, District Judge.

Joshua Samuel Knafel, a federal inmate proceeding pro se, filed a motion (Docket No. 90) pursuant to Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure seeking de novo review of his judgment in light of Alleyne v. United States , 133 S.Ct. 2151 (2013).[1] The court finds that Knafel's instant motion is, for all intents and purposes, an unauthorized, successive § 2255 motion and, therefore, dismisses it without prejudice.[2]

Knafel challenges his conviction and 96-month sentence for conspiring to distribute 100 kilograms or more of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(b)(1)(B) and 846. Court records indicate that Knafel previously filed a § 2255 motion regarding the same conviction and sentence, which the court denied. See Docket Nos. 85, 88, and 89. The court may consider a second or successive § 2255 motion only upon specific certification from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that the claims in the motion meet certain criteria.[3] See § 2255(h). As Knafel has not submitted any evidence of having obtained certification from the Court of Appeals to file a second or successive § 2255 motion, the court must dismiss his motion without prejudice as successive.[4]


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.