Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_01-cv-05938/USCOURTS-caed-1_01-cv-05938-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 510
Nature of Suit: Prisoner Petitions - Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (Federal)

---

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

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiffs,

v.

THEODORE RICHARD III,

Defendants.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

1:97-cr-5220 OWW LJO

1:01-cv-5938 OWW LJO

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO

VACATE, SET ASIDE OR

CORRECT SENTENCE 

This case is before the Court on the Petition of Theodore

Richard III, a federal prisoner, who filed a motion for relief to

vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence imposed pursuant to

the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Petitioner attacks his

sentence pronounced February 19, 1999, of 168 months in custody

following a jury verdict on November 12, 1998, finding him guilty

of the crime of conspiracy to distribute and possess with the

intent to distribute cocaine base. 

The Magistrate Judge filed Findings and Recommendations on

November 8, 2005, exhaustively analyzing all issues raised by

Petitioner with meticulous detail to the trial record and the

extended evidentiary hearing and sentencing proceedings held over

two days, culminating in the February 19, 1999, sentence. 

Case 1:01-cv-05938-OWW Document 3 Filed 11/23/05 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

27

28

2

The Court has considered, de novo, the Petition, all issues

presented, and the Magistrate Judge’s Findings and

Recommendations. None of the issues raised justify any change in

Petitioner’s conviction or sentence. He has withdrawn his claim

that he was unconstitutionally sentenced based upon Blakley v.

Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), in light of United States v.

Booker, 125 S.Ct. 738 (2005). Neither the Blakely standards nor

developments in the law following the 1998 conviction and 1999

sentence retroactively apply to this case. United States v.

Cruz, 423 F.3d 1119, 1120 (9th Cir. 2005) (the rule announced by

Booker and Blakely does not operate retroactively). This is not

a pending sentencing case. United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d

1073 (9th Cir. 2005) (en banc). Ameline does not apply. United

States v. Moreno-Hernandez, 419 F.3d 906, 916 (9th Cir. 2005),

cert. denied, 2005 WL 292683 (Nov. 07, 2005) (Ameline limited

remand applies to pending direct criminal appeals). 

The Magistrate Judge has accurately analyzed the trial

record and the detailed record of the extended sentencing

proceedings. There is no error. The Petitioner’s motion to

Vacate, Set Aside, Correct Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is

DENIED. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 22, 2005.

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER

_____________________________

Oliver W. Wanger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Case 1:01-cv-05938-OWW Document 3 Filed 11/23/05 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

27

28

3

For the reasons stated in the Findings and Recommendations

of the Magistrate Judge, and above, no issue debatable among

jurists of reason is presented and accordingly, no certificate of

appealability shall issue. 

SO ORDERED.

DATED: November 22, 2005.

/s/ OLIVER W. WANGER

______________________________

 Oliver W. Wanger

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:01-cv-05938-OWW Document 3 Filed 11/23/05 Page 3 of 3