HOWARD
v.
UNITES STATES OF AMERICA
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Howard filed a § 2255 motion to vacate his 120-month sentence for felon in possession of a firearm while his direct appeal was pending. The district court dismissed the motion for lack of jurisdiction, holding that courts cannot adjudicate collateral relief motions during the pendency of a direct appeal absent extraordinary circumstances.
The district court lacks jurisdiction to consider and rule on a § 2255 motion during the pendency of a direct appeal. Absent extraordinary circumstances, a defendant may not seek collateral relief while a direct appeal is pending because the outcome of the direct appeal may negate the need for habeas relief.
[1] A district court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate a motion to vacate a sentence under 28 U.S.C. …
[2] Absent extraordinary circumstances, a defendant may not seek collateral relief while a direct appeal is pending, as the outcome of the direct appeal may negate the need f…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider and rule on Dunham's § 2255 motion during the pendency of her direct appeal of her sentence”
Establishes the core rule that district courts lack jurisdiction to adjudicate collateral relief motions while direct appeals are pending
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThaddeus Timeous Howard was convicted and sentenced to 120 months imprisonment for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition. While his …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jurisdiction Pending Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Thaddeus Timeous Howard moves under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his sentence and challenges the validity of his conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm and ammunition, for which he is imprisoned for 120 months. The United States responds that the district court currently lacks jurisdiction over Howard's Section 2255 motion because of a pending appeal. (Civ. Doc. 6 citing United States v. Howard, Case No. 24-11168, Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals) Nevertheless, the United States urges the district court to stay this case until the circuit court issues its mandate and thereafter to dismiss this action as untimely. Because Howard's appeal is still pending, the district court lacks jurisdiction to adjudicate the Section 2255 motion. See United States v. Dunham, 240 F. 3d 1328, 1329–30 (11th Cir. 2001) (“We conclude that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider and rule on Dunham's § 2255 motion during the pendency of her direct appeal of her sentence, and therefore her appeal of the district court's denial of that motion is dismissed without prejudice and the district court's order denying
Dunham's § 2255 motion is vacated without prejudice to Dunham's right to file a § 2255 motion after the disposition of her direct appeal."). No extraordinary circumstances warrant the district court staying this case. See United States v. Casaran- Rivas, 311 F. App’x 269, 272 (11th Cir. 2009) ("[A]bsent extraordinary circumstances, a defendant may not seek collateral relief while his direct appeal is pending, as the outcome of the direct appeal may negate the need for habeas relief.”) (citations omitted).
Howard's motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction. The dismissal is without prejudice to Howard filing a motion to vacate, in a new case with a new case number, after final disposition of his appeal. The clerk must CLOSE this case and enter a copy of this order in the criminal case.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on August 20, 2024.