Opinion
4:96CR00233-27-WRW.
August 17, 2007
ORDER
Petitioner has filed a Motion for District Court to Recall Its Judgment to Achieve Justice And/Or Motion for Relief From Judgment (Doc. No. 1213), which is really a fifth motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255.
See Doc. Nos. 1061, 1194, 1201, and 1207.
The Eighth Circuit has held that a petitioner may not circumvent § 2255 procedural requirements by bringing successive § 2255 action under another name. When a petitioner is attempting to circumvent these procedural requirements, a court may reclassify the petitioner's motion. Typically a court must warn a petitioner before reclassifying his pleading as a § 2255 motion. However, this warning does not apply to a petitioner who has presented a previous § 2255 motion and had the opportunity to bring all of his collateral challenges in the previous motion.
See United States v. Patton, 309 F.3d 1093 (8th Cir. 2002) (listing cases).
Morales v. United States, 304 F.3d 764, 765 (8th Cir. 2002).
See Willoughby v. United States, No. Civ 01-588-ADM, 2002 WL 31548082, at *3 n. 1 (D. Minn. Nov. 12, 2002); Sheldon v. Hollingsworth, No. Civ. 05-319PAM, 2005 WL 846220, at *2 (D. Minn. Apr. 4, 2005).
Since I am reclassifying Petitioner's motion as a § 2255 motion, it is a successive § 2255 motion. As amended in April 1996 by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act, § 2255 requires that all successive § 2255 motions be certified by the appropriate court of appeals before they are considered by the district courts.
Because Petitioner failed to obtain certification from the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, his motion must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, Petitioner's Motion for District Court to Recall Its Judgment to Achieve Justice And/Or Motion for Relief From Judgment (Doc. No. 1213) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.