From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Upshaw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
Jul 9, 2014
CASE NO. 4:02cr3-MW/CAS (N.D. Fla. Jul. 9, 2014)

Summary

concluding § 2255 motion was untimely because Descamps is not retroactive to cases on collateral review

Summary of this case from Johnson v. United States

Opinion

CASE NO. 4:02cr3-MW/CAS CASE NO. 4:14cv278-MW/CAS

07-09-2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. DANIEL JUNIOR UPSHAW, Defendant.


ORDER ACCEPTING

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court has considered the Magistrate's Report and Recommendation, ECF No.52, filed June 19, 2014, and has also reviewed de novo Defendant's objections to the report and recommendation, ECF No. 53, filed July 7, 2014. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted, over Defendant's objections, as this Court's opinion. The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, "The motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence, ECF No. 51, is DENIED and DISMISSED as untimely. A certificate of appealability is DENIED." The Clerk shall close the file.

Mark E. Walker

United States District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Upshaw

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION
Jul 9, 2014
CASE NO. 4:02cr3-MW/CAS (N.D. Fla. Jul. 9, 2014)

concluding § 2255 motion was untimely because Descamps is not retroactive to cases on collateral review

Summary of this case from Johnson v. United States
Case details for

United States v. Upshaw

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. DANIEL JUNIOR UPSHAW, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

Date published: Jul 9, 2014

Citations

CASE NO. 4:02cr3-MW/CAS (N.D. Fla. Jul. 9, 2014)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. Baltazar

Wilson offers no evidence that the United States Supreme Court or the Third Circuit has held that Mathis or…

Price v. United States

Thus, as several other district courts have already held, the rule announced in Descamps is not retroactive…