Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01433/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01433-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 540
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Mandamus and Other
Cause of Action: 28:1651 Petition for Writ of Mandamus

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOHNNY TED NASH, )

)

)

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. )

)

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

)

)

Respondent. )

)

)

No. CV-F-05-1433 REC/HC

(No. CR-F-92-5167 EDP) 

ORDER DISMISSING MOTION FOR

RESENTENCING UNDER THE ALL

WRITS ACT, 28 U.S.C. §

1651(a) AND DIRECTING CLERK

TO ENTER JUDGMENT FOR

RESPONDENT 

On November 8, 2005, petitioner Johnny Ted Nash filed a

motion for resentencing pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1651(a). 

Petitioner was convicted by jury trial on two counts of

conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine, one conspiracy

occurring in 1986-1988 and the other occurring in 1992. In

addition, petitioner pleaded guilty to a charge of failure to

appear in No. CR-F-93-5013 EDP. Petitioner was sentenced on

April 26, 1994 to 348 months in custody in the instant case and

Case 1:05-cv-01433-REC Document 2 Filed 11/17/05 Page 1 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

12 months in custody in No. CR-F-93-5013 EDP, to be served

consecutively to the sentence imposed in the instant case. 

Petitioner’s conviction and sentence in the instant case were

affirmed on appeal. Petitioner thereafter filed several motions

unsuccessfully collaterally attacking his conviction and

sentence, including motions for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

2255 and the All Writs Act. 

In the instant motion, petitioner contends that he is

entitled to be resentenced to time served because his Sixth

Amendment right to a jury trial was violated because the jury did

not find the quantity of drugs in reaching its guilty verdict and

Judge Price enhanced his sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines

on the basis of facts found by Judge Price when he adopted the

findings of the Presentence Report.

The court dismisses the instant motion. As the court has

ruled previously, petitioner cannot rely on the All Writs Act to

circumvent that procedural requirements for the filing of a

second or successive petition under the AEDPA. See United States

v. Valdez-Pachecho, 237 F.3d 1077 (9 Cir. 2001). Because the th

court concludes that the instant motion is a second or successive

motion for relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255, this court lacks

jurisdiction to consider the merits of the claims made by

petitioner. United States v. Allen, 157 F.3d 661, 664 (9 Cir. th

1988). Therefore, petitioner must apply to the Ninth Circuit for

leave to file a second or successive petition pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2244.

Case 1:05-cv-01433-REC Document 2 Filed 11/17/05 Page 2 of 3
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

3

ACCORDINGLY:

1. Petitioner Johnny Ted Nash’s motion for resentencing

pursuant to the All Writs Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a) is dismissed

for lack of jurisdiction.

2. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment for respondent.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 16, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01433-REC Document 2 Filed 11/17/05 Page 3 of 3