3:19-cr-00117•USA v. LEIBA et al
Texte intégral
Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. Case Nos.: 3:19cr117/TKW/MAL 3:26cv4896/TKW/MAL SAM JONES, JR., Defendant. _____________________________/ REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION This matter is before me upon Defendant Sam Jones Jr.’s motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and supporting memorandum of law. ECF Nos. 192, 193. Defendant previously filed a § 2255 motion that was denied on the merits. ECF No. 186. Therefore, 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h) requires, as the district court previously advised, that he obtain permission from the Eleventh Circuit before filing a second or successive motion. See ECF No. 189, 191. There is no indication in the motion that Defendant was granted (or even requested) permission from the Eleventh Circuit to file this motion, and the Eleventh Circuit’s electronic records confirm that no such request was filed as of this date. Therefore, the Court does not have jurisdiction to consider the merits of Defendant’s Case 3:19-cr-00117-TKW-MAL Document 194 Filed 08/05/26 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2 second § 2255 motion. See Burcks v. United States, 842 F. App’x 500, 502 (11th Cir. 2021) (citing Farris v. United States, 333 F. 3d 1211, 1216 (11th Cir. 2003)). Accordingly, it is RECOMMENDED that Defendant’s motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. DONE on August 5, 2026. s/ Midori A. Lowry Midori A. Lowry United States Magistrate Judge NOTICE TO THE PARTIES The case was referred to a magistrate judge for the issuance of all preliminary orders and any recommendations to the district court regarding dispositive matters. See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.2(B); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within fourteen days of the date of the Report and Recommendation. Any different deadline that may appear on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only and does not control. An objecting party must serve a copy of its objections on all other parties. A party who fails to object to the magistrate judge’s findings or recommendations contained in a report and recommendation waives the right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order based on the unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. See 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; 28 U.S.C. § 636. Case 3:19-cr-00117-TKW-MAL Document 194 Filed 08/05/26 Page 2 of 2
Vous vous demandez comment ce texte s’applique à votre situation ?
Consultation gratuite, sans engagement
Décrivez votre situation. Notre équipe vous recontactera par e-mail pour votre consultation.
Poursuivez vos recherches dans ChatGPT ou Claude
Connectez Omnilex pour rechercher dans le corpus juridique depuis votre assistant IA.