Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00978/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-00978-0/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

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

TIMOTHY WAYNE ARNETT, )

)

)

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. )

)

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

)

Respondent. )

)

)

No. CV-F-05-978 REC

(No. CR-F-95-5287 OWW) 

ORDER DISMISSING MOTION TO

VACATE, SET ASIDE OR CORRECT

SENTENCE PURSUANT TO 28

U.S.C. § 2255 WITHOUT

PREJUDICE AS PREMATURE

On July 25, 2005, petitioner Timothy Wayne Arnett filed a

motion to vacate, set aside or correct sentence pursuant to 28

U.S.C. § 2255. 

Petitioner was convicted by jury in 1998 of seven counts of

armed bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. 2113 and seven

counts of use of a firearm during a crime of violence in

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Petitioner appealed these

convictions to the Ninth Circuit. By decisions filed on December

23, 2004, petitioner’s convictions of armed bank robbery were

affirmed, United States v. Arnett, 2003 WL 23095754 (9 Cir. th

Case 1:05-cv-00978-OWW Document 2 Filed 09/13/05 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

2003), but his convictions of violation of Section 924(c) were

reversed and remanded for retrial, United States v. Arnett, 353

F.3d 765 (9 Cir. 2003). Petitioner was retried and convicted th

on the Section 924(c) counts on August 10, 2005. Petitioner is

now proceeding with post-conviction motions and resentencing.

In his Section 2255 motion, petitioner contends that his

convictions of seven counts of armed bank robbery are

constitutionally defective because the prosecution knowingly

presented FDIC certificates and a NCUA certificate as duplicates

when each certificate was made shortly before trial. 

The court rules that petitioner’s Section 2255 motion is

premature and denies it without prejudice on that ground. In

United States v. Colvin, 204 F.3d 1221, 1225 (9 Cir. 2000), the th

Ninth Circuit that, in those cases in which the Ninth Circuit

either partially or wholly reverses a defendant’s conviction or

sentence, or both, and expressly remand to the district court,

the judgment does not become final, and the

statute of limitations does not begin to run,

until the district court has entered an

amended judgment and the time for appealing

that judgment has passed.

In addition, petitioner faces the risk that a subsequent motion

for relief under Section 2255 directed to his convictions of

Section 924(c) may be considered a second or successive petition,

leave for which must be obtained by the Ninth Circuit.

ACCORDINGLY:

1. Petitioner’s motion to vacate, set aside or correct

sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is dismissed without

Case 1:05-cv-00978-OWW Document 2 Filed 09/13/05 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

prejudice as premature.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 12, 2005 /s/ Robert E. Coyle 

668554 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00978-OWW Document 2 Filed 09/13/05 Page 3 of 3