Source: http://ks.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20180117_0000070.DKS.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 22:38:40+00:00

Document:
Petitioner Deshane Gantt has filed a “Motion Pursuant to Rule 60(b)(5) & (6) to Reopen Case and Set [Aside] Order Denying Relief” (Doc. 76). In this motion, he requests that the Court set aside a November 22, 2013 Order that denied his claims for relief asserted under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The government contends that the Court lacks jurisdiction to rule on Petitioner's motion because it is an unauthorized successive § 2255 motion. In addition, the government contends that the motion is untimely and substantively infirm. As will be explained below, the Court dismisses Petitioner's motion because it lacks jurisdiction.
The facts surrounding Petitioner's judgment of conviction are as follows. On November 9, 2010, Petitioner was charged with one count of bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a) and (d) (Count I) and one count of carrying, using, and brandishing a firearm during and relating to the bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1) (Count II). On January 24, 2011, Petitioner pled guilty to the second count. In his written plea agreement, he admitted that he entered a federal credit union, armed with a 9 mm Highpoint pistol, and ordered several employees to the floor. He removed cash, approximately $7, 800, from the teller drawers and fled the building. On April 25, 2011, the Court sentenced Petitioner to a term of 20 years.
Over three years later, on July 19, 2017, Petitioner filed this Motion for Reconsideration. He states that he is proceeding under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(5) and (6). In this motion, he requests that the Court reopen the case and set aside the previous order denying his § 2255 claim. He also states that he would like the Court to vacate its prior judgment and withdraw his plea for ineffective assistance of counsel. In the alternative, he requests an evidentiary hearing.
[t]he judge who receives the motion must properly examine it. If it plainly appears from the motion, any attached exhibits, and the record of prior proceedings that the moving party is not entitled to relief, the judge must dismiss the motion . . . . If the motion is not dismissed, the judge must order the United States attorney to file an answer, motion, or other response within a fixed time, or to take other action the judge may order.
The court must hold an evidentiary hearing on a § 2255 motion “[u]nless the motion and the files and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” The petitioner must allege facts that, if proven, would warrant relief from his conviction or sentence. An evidentiary hearing is not necessary where a § 2255 motion contains factual allegations that are contradicted by the record, inherently incredible, or when they are conclusions rather than statements of fact.

References: § 2255
 § 2255
 § 2113
 § 924
 § 2255
 § 2255
 § 2255