Thomas C. Wiggins v. United States

53 F.3d 335, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23345, 1995 WL 250828
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedMay 1, 1995
Docket94-3608
StatusPublished

This text of 53 F.3d 335 (Thomas C. Wiggins v. United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Thomas C. Wiggins v. United States, 53 F.3d 335, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23345, 1995 WL 250828 (8th Cir. 1995).

Opinion

53 F.3d 335
NOTICE: Eighth Circuit Rule 28A(k) governs citation of unpublished opinions and provides that no party may cite an opinion not intended for publication unless the cases are related by identity between the parties or the causes of action.

Thomas C. WIGGINS, Appellant,
v.
UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 94-3608

United States Court of Appeals,
Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Apr. 21, 1995.
Filed: May 1, 1995.

Before LOKEN, HANSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Thomas C. Wiggins pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. Secs. 922(g)(1) and 924(e). The district court1 denied his postconviction motion under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255, and Wiggins did not appeal. Wiggins then filed this second Sec. 2255 motion raising three new grounds-that he was forced to plead guilty because counsel was unprepared for trial; that counsel was ineffective for failing to locate a witness who would have testified in Wiggins's favor; and that Wiggins was denied his right to appeal because counsel advised that no one from her office could represent him on an ineffective-assistance claim.

After giving Wiggins an opportunity to show cause why his second Sec. 2255 motion should not be dismissed as an abuse of the writ, the district court dismissed the motion on this ground. After careful review of the record, we agree with the district court that Wiggins's successive petition for postconviction relief must be dismissed as an abuse of the writ. See McCleskey v. Zant, 499 U.S. 467, 489-95 (1991); United States v. Fallon, 992 F.2d 212, 213 (8th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we affirm.

1

The HONORABLE GEORGE F. GUNN, JR., United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendation of the HONORABLE LAWRENCE O. DAVIS, United States Magistrate Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

McCleskey v. Zant
499 U.S. 467 (Supreme Court, 1991)
United States v. Jodie Marie Fallon
992 F.2d 212 (Eighth Circuit, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
53 F.3d 335, 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 23345, 1995 WL 250828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-c-wiggins-v-united-states-ca8-1995.