From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Morrison

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Nov 16, 2005
Case No. 1:03-CR-103 (W.D. Mich. Nov. 16, 2005)

Opinion

Case No. 1:03-CR-103.

November 16, 2005


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on Defendant Dennis Wayne Morrison's Motion to Reconsider. On May 14, 2003, Defendant pled guilty to one count of possession of visual depictions of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(4)(B), 2252(b)(2), and 2256. On October 21, 2003, Defendant was sentenced by this Court to a term of 60 months incarceration. Judgment was entered on October 22, 2003. Defendant did not appeal his sentence and his conviction became final on November 4, 2003. Defendant moved for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 on November 5, 2004. Thereafter, Defendant sought permission to amend his section 2255 motion in light of United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005). The Court denied Defendant's request on March 22, 2005, and Defendant's Motion asks the Court to reconsider that Order.

The Court held that " Booker does not apply retroactively on collateral review to cases `already final on direct review' at the time the Supreme Court issued the Booker decision." (Mar. 22, 2005 Order citing Humphress v. United States, 398 F.3d 855, 860-63 (6th Cir. 2005)). "[M]otions for reconsideration that merely present the same issues ruled upon by the Court shall not be granted." W.D. MICH. LCIVR 7.4(a). Defendant's Motion to Reconsider posed the "question in the instant case [a]s whether United States v. Booker (cite omitted) can be applied retroactively?" (Def.'s Mot. to Reconsider at 3). Accordingly, the Court will deny Defendant's Motion to Reconsider because it asserts the same issue already ruled on by the Court and because he has not demonstrated that the Court's March 22, 2005 Order suffers from a palpable defect nor has he shown that a different result is manifest. W.D. MICH. LCIVR 7.4(a).

In Defendant's Motion to Reconsider he also relies on Dodd v. United States, 125 S. Ct. 2478 (2005). Although it is unclear exactly how Dodd's holding supports his Motion, what is clear is that any favorable application of Dodd would require retroactivity of Booker, and as this Court has already indicated, Booker does not apply retroactively on collateral review to cases already final on direct review. Humphress, 398 F.3d at 860-63. Therefore, to the extent that Defendant relies on Dodd, his Motion essentially presents the same issue previously ruled on by the Court.

THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant Dennis Wayne Morrison's Motion to Reconsider (Dkt. No. 50) is DENIED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Morrison

United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division
Nov 16, 2005
Case No. 1:03-CR-103 (W.D. Mich. Nov. 16, 2005)
Case details for

U.S. v. Morrison

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DENNIS WAYNE MORRISON, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Michigan, Southern Division

Date published: Nov 16, 2005

Citations

Case No. 1:03-CR-103 (W.D. Mich. Nov. 16, 2005)