United States v. Fowler

133 F. App'x 922
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 17, 2005
Docket05-6493
StatusUnpublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 133 F. App'x 922 (United States v. Fowler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Fowler, 133 F. App'x 922 (4th Cir. 2005).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On or about March 24, 2005, Kevin Ray Fowler filed a notice of appeal from his December 16, 1996, criminal judgment. Because Fowler previously filed an appeal from his 1996 judgment and this Court disposed of the appeal by affirming Fowler’s convictions and sentence, this Court is without jurisdiction to entertain a second appeal from the same judgment. In addition, this court does not have jurisdiction because the appeal is clearly untimely as to the December 16, 1996, judgment. See Fed. R.App. P. 4(b)(1). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Fowler seeks a review of his sentence based upon the rules announced in United States v. Booker, — U.S.-, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005) and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004). If Fowler were to seek relief from his sentence in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion, he would need authorization from this court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 2244 and 2255 because he previously unsuccessfully sought § 2255 relief. Construing his notice of appeal as a motion for authorization, we deny authorization because neither Booker nor Blakely announced a new rule of constitutional law *923 made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED

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

Related

Scala v. United States
445 F. Supp. 2d 248 (E.D. New York, 2006)
Khan v. United States
414 F. Supp. 2d 210 (E.D. New York, 2006)
In Re: Zambrano
433 F.3d 886 (D.C. Circuit, 2006)
Martin v. United States
395 F. Supp. 2d 326 (D. South Carolina, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
133 F. App'x 922, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-fowler-ca4-2005.