Opinion
Case No. 2:15CR00015-009
02-21-2019
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. SAMUEL LEE COURTNEY, Defendant.
Samuel Lee Courtney, Pro Se Defendant.
OPINION
Samuel Lee Courtney, Pro Se Defendant.
The defendant, Samuel Lee Courtney, proceeding pro se, filed a second Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Among other things, Courtney alleges that he is entitled to be resentenced in light of United States v. Simms, 914 F.3d 229 (4th Cir. 2019) (holding that brandishing a firearm in connection with a crime of violence, as defined in 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(B), is unconstitutionally vague). After review of the record, I must summarily deny Courtney's § 2255 motion as successive.
Under Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2255 Proceedings, the court may summarily dismiss a § 2255 motion where it is clear from the motion and the record of prior proceedings that the defendant is not entitled to relief.
This court may consider a second or successive § 2255 motion only upon specific certification from the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit that the claims in the motion meet certain criteria. See § 2255(h). Court records indicate that Courtney previously filed a § 2255 motion concerning this same conviction and sentence, and I dismissed it as without merit. United States v. Courtney, No. 2:15CR00015-009, 2018 WL 510110 (W.D. Va. Jan. 23, 2018). Because Courtney offers no indication that he has obtained certification from the court of appeals to file a second or successive § 2255 motion, I must dismiss Courtney's current action without prejudice.
A separate Final Order will be entered herewith.
DATED: February 21, 2019
/s/ James P. Jones
United States District Judge