USA v. Griffin

1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
United States of America,
Plaintiff,
v. 	Case No. 12-cr-123 (JNE)
ORDER
Bryant Duane Griffin,
Defendant.
In 2023, Defendant moved for authorization to file a second or successive motion
under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 based on United States v. Owen, 51 F.4th 292 (8th Cir. 2022).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied the motion. In 2025,
Defendant moved again for authorization to file a second or successive motion under
§ 2255 based on Owen. The Eighth Circuit denied the motion.
A few days after the Eighth Circuit denied his 2025 motion, the Court received
Defendant’s motion for a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). The
motion for a sentence reduction is based on Owen and United States v. Heard, 62 F.4th
1109 (8th Cir. 2023). The government opposed the motion for a sentence reduction.1
Defendant’s motion for a sentence reduction is a second or successive § 2255
motion filed without the Eighth Circuit’s authorization. See United States v. Johnson,
No. 24-2393, 2025 WL 1949738, at *2 (8th Cir. July 16, 2025) (per curiam); United
States v. Crandall, 25 F.4th 582, 586 (8th Cir. 2022); United States v. Fine, 982 F.3d
1117, 1118–19 (8th Cir. 2020). The Court therefore denies the motion and declines to
1 	The government’s motions for an extension of time to respond are granted.
CASE 0:12-cr-00123-JNE-JJG Doc. 188 Filed 04/21/26 Page 1 of 2

2
issue a certificate of appealability. See United States v. Lambros, 404 F.3d 1034, 1036
(8th Cir. 2005).
Based on the files, records, and proceedings herein, and for the reasons stated
above, IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. 	Defendant’s motion [Docket No. 172] is DENIED.
2. 	A certificate of appealability is DENIED.
3. 	The government’s motions for an extension of time to respond [Docket
Nos. 175, 178 & 183] are GRANTED.
Dated: April 21, 2026
s/Joan N. Ericksen
JOAN N. ERICKSEN
United States District Judge
CASE 0:12-cr-00123-JNE-JJG Doc. 188 Filed 04/21/26 Page 2 of 2