Williams v. Warden Winn Corr Ctr

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-31158
Summary Calendar
LARRY WILLIAMS,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
WARDEN, WINN CORRECTIONAL CENTER,
Respondent-Appellee.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 99-CV-1611
--------------------
July 29, 2002
Before JOLLY, BENAVIDES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Larry Williams, Louisiana prisoner # 86172, seeks a
certificate of appealability (“COA”) to appeal the denial of his
“motion for default judgment,” filed after the district court
conditionally granted his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition and after the
state court resentenced him. To the extent that Williams argues
that the State failed to comply with the district court’s
judgment by returning him to the Tenth instead of the Eleventh
Judicial District Court of Louisiana for resentencing, COA is

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 01-31158
-2-
DENIED. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473,
484 (2000).
To the extent that Williams’ postjudgment motion sought
review of the newly imposed state court sentence on the merits,
the motion was unauthorized and should have been denied for lack
of jurisdiction. See United States v. Early, 27 F.3d 140, 141-42
(5th Cir. 1994). Under this second argument, because Williams
has “appealed from the denial of a meaningless, unauthorized
motion” (id. at 142), COA is not necessary. See 28 U.S.C.
§ 2253(c)(1)(B). Under this ground, the appeal is without
arguable merit and thus frivolous. Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215,
219-20 (5th Cir. 1983). Accordingly, it is DISMISSED. See 5th
Cir. Rule. 42.2.
COA DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.

-- 2 of 2 --