United States v. Montalvo
This text of 135 F. App'x 90 (United States v. Montalvo) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Michael L. Montalvo appeals pro se from the district court’s denial of his motion, brought under former Fed.R.Crim.P. 35(a), to correct the life sentence imposed upon resentencing for his 1989 conviction for operating a continuing criminal enterprise, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court’s ruling on a motion brought under former Rule 35(a) for “illegality or gross abuse of discretion,” United States v. Housepian, 359 F.3d 1144, 1153 (9th Cir.2004) (en banc), and we affirm.
Montalvo contends that the district court grossly abused its discretion when it denied his Rule 35(a) motion. We disagree. The district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that the law of the case doctrine foreclosed consideration of his arguments. See United States v. Alexander, 106 F.3d 874, 876 (9th Cir.1997) (stating that a court is generally precluded from reconsidering an issue that has already been decided by the same court or a higher court in the identical case).
AFFIRMED.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
135 F. App'x 90, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-montalvo-ca9-2005.