[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 14

- 10221 Non

- Argument Calendar

________________________ D.C. Docket No s . 1:13

- cv - 01780

- RWS ; 1:09

- cr - 00286

- RWS

- JFD

- 1

DWIGHT DARYL OWENS, Petitioner

- Appellant,

versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent

- Appellee.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia

________________________ (March 6, 2015) Before ED CARNES , Chief Judge, MARCUS, and WILLIAM PRYOR, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:

Case: 14-10221 Date Filed: 03/06/2015 Page: 1 of 32 A jury convicted Dwight Daryl Owens of two crimes: (1) robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1951 (count 1) , and (2) using a firearm during and in relation to that robbery, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) (count 2)

. The dist rict court sentenced Owens to consecutive terms of imprisonment of 180 months on count 1 and 120 months on count 2, for a total term of 300 months. Owens appealed his convictions, and we affirmed them.
Owens t hen filed a timely moti on to vacate his sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Among other things, Owens contended that his 120

- month sentence on count 2 was unconstitutional in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in Alleyne v. United States , 570 U.S. ___, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) . The district court determined that Alleyne did not apply retroactively on collateral review, denied Owens’ motion, and declined to issue a certificate of appealability (COA)

. We issued a
COA on two issues: (1) whether Alleyne applies retroactively, an d (2) if so, whether Owens’ sentence is unconstitutional

. We review de novo whether a case applies retroactively on collateral review.
See United States v. Swindall , 107 F.3d 831, 833 (11th Cir. 1997). See generally Teague v. Lane , 489 U.S. 288 , 109 S. Ct. 1060 (1989). But if we have already decided that a case does not apply retroactively on collateral review, we are bound by that decision unless the Supreme Court or this Court sitting en banc overrules it.
See Chambers v. Thompson , 150 F.3d 1324, 1326 (11th Cir. 1998).

Case: 14-10221 Date Filed: 03/06/2015 Page: 2 of 33 In Jeanty v. Warden, FCI

- Miami , 757 F .3d 1283, 1285 (11th Cir. 2014) , we decided that Alleyne does not apply retroactively on collateral review and affirmed a district court’s denial of a prisoner’s petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 on that basis

. 1 Our decision in Jeanty controls this case. 2
AFFIRMED. 3

1 Notably, every circuit to have considered the issue has said that Alleyne does not apply retroactively on collateral review. See Hughes v. United States , 770 F.3d 814, 818

– 19 (9th Cir. 2014); In re Mazzio , 756 F.3d 487, 489

– 91 (6th Cir. 2014); United Sta tes v. Winkelman , 746 F.3d 134, 136 (3d Cir. 2014); In re Kemper , 735 F.3d 211, 212 (5th Cir. 2013); United States v. Redd , 735 F.3d 88, 91

– 92 (2d Cir. 2013); In re Payne , 733 F.3d 1027, 1029 (10th Cir. 2013); Simpson v. United States , 721 F.3d 875, 876 (7 th Cir. 2013).

2 Because we conclude that Alleyne does not apply retroactively on co llateral review, we do not consider what the result in Owens’ case would be if it did

. 3 Owen s ’ motion for leave to file a reply brief out of time is GRANTED

. Case: 14-10221 Date Filed: 03/06/2015 Page: 3 of 3