United States v. Mark A. Mayne
Opinion
Mark A. Mayne, a pro se federal prisoner, appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of audita querela, filed pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651. After review, we affirm. 1
Mayne’s petition collaterally attacks his sentence in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Because the relief Mayne seeks — the vacatur of his original sentence on constitutional grounds — is cognizable under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, the district court correctly denied his petition for a writ of audita querela. See United States v. Holt, 417 F.3d 1172, 1173-75 (11th Cir. 2005).
Additionally, Mayne previously filed a § 2255 motion, which was denied, and Mayne did not obtain authorization from this Court to file a second § 2255 motion. Thus, the district court lacked jurisdiction to review Mayne’s pro se petition as a second or successive § 2255 motion. See id. at 1175. Further, we would not have authorized a second or successive § 2255 motion because the constitutional rule announced in Booker does not apply retroactively on collateral review. See In re Anderson, 396 F.3d 1336, 1339-40 (11th Cir. 2005).
AFFIRMED.
. “We review de novo the question of whether a prisoner may challenge his sentence by filing a motion for a writ of audita querela." United States v. Holt, 417 F.3d 1172, 1174 (11th Cir. 2005).
Reference
- Full Case Name
- UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mark A. MAYNE, Defendant-Appellant
- Status
- Unpublished