United States v. Melvin Wiand

Fifth Circuit

United States v. Melvin Wiand

673 F. App'x 429

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 17, 2017

Docket15-10835 Summary Calendar

StatusUnpublished

This text of 673 F. App'x 429 (United States v. Melvin Wiand) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth 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. Melvin Wiand, 673 F. App'x 429 (5th Cir. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

Melvin Wiand, federal prisoner # 37221-177, has appealed the district court’s order construing his motion invoking Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and transferring the matter to this court for further proceedings. Wiand asserts that his conviction resulted from a “forged and fabricated” consent-to-search form and that his attorney rendered ineffective assistance in failing to *430 challenge the form at the suppression hearing. Because these claims were raised and rejected in a prior § 2255 proceeding, they are successive. See Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 532, 125 S.Ct. 2641, 162 L.Ed.2d 480 (2005).

Wiand has not obtained this court’s leave to file a second or successive § 2255 motion. See § 2255(h). Accordingly, the motion was unauthorized, and the district court lacked jurisdiction. See In re Sepulvado, 707 F.3d 550, 556 (5th Cir. 2013). The appeal is DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Wiand is WARNED that frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings will invite the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his ability to file pleadings in this court and any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4,

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

PER CURIAM: *

Melvin Wiand, federal prisoner # 37221-177, has appealed the district court’s order construing his motion invoking Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as a second or successive motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and transferring the matter to this court for further proceedings. Wiand asserts that his conviction resulted from a “forged and fabricated” consent-to-search form and that his attorney rendered ineffective assistance in failing to *430 challenge the form at the suppression hearing. Because these claims were raised and rejected in a prior § 2255 proceeding, they are successive. See Gonzalez v. Crosby, 545 U.S. 524, 532, 125 S.Ct. 2641, 162 L.Ed.2d 480 (2005).

Wiand has not obtained this court’s leave to file a second or successive § 2255 motion. See § 2255(h). Accordingly, the motion was unauthorized, and the district court lacked jurisdiction. See In re Sepulvado, 707 F.3d 550, 556 (5th Cir. 2013). The appeal is DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Wiand is WARNED that frivolous, repetitive, or otherwise abusive filings will invite the imposition of sanctions, including dismissal, monetary sanctions, and restrictions on his ability to file pleadings in this court and any court subject to this court’s jurisdiction.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

673 F. App'x 429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-melvin-wiand-ca5-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack