Free USCA Mandate - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

I l . I
i sitniti
i D. Conn. i
(` OO—cr-69
Nevas, J.
United States Court of Appeals
( ron rua u
SECOND CIRCUIT
A At a stated term ofthe United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit, held at the Daniel Patrick Meynillant United States COLl1‘tl10USe, 500 Pearl
Sl.`l'€Ct, lll tl'l€ OfNCW YOI'l{, on the {Y} ttl day of ( ( (, two lZl'lOLlS3I'1d eight, i
Present: A
Hon. José A. Cabranes,
. B-{ES COURT 0
Hon. BEl1`l'lI1gtOI`l P3.1'l(€I`, #951 FILED pqb
. · A
Hon. Reena Ragg1, gb o ( 2
Circuit Judges. JU'- " 7 2005
Q Mui'!} Ueilir _
’°`°¤~¤”iua¤°"
Jason Cox,
Petitioner, y A
v. A 08-2692+op (
United States of America, (
Respondent. u
t Petitioner, pro se, requests an order authorizing the United States District Court for the District of p ,
Connecticut to consider a second or successive 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. Upon due consideration,
g it is hereby ORDERED that the motion is DENIED because Petitioner has not satisfied the criteria
set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h).
( The Supreme Court has recently ruled that a person who trades his drugs for a gun does not “use”
a firearm within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). See Watson v. United States, 128 S.Ct. 579, y
581 (U.S. Dec. 10, 2007).. Nevertheless, 28 U.S.C. §§ 224-4(b) and 2255(h) prohibit Cox from filing
a second or successive § 2255 motion based on Watson for at least three reasons: (1) Watson is a (
statutory, not constitutional, rule; (2) Cox raised this claim in his first § 2255 motion; and (3) to the
extent that Watson is a new rule of law, the Supreme Court has not made it retroactive to cases on
collateral review. To the extent that Cox asserts actual innocence, his claim would fail even in a first p
iKiTi€t5i3ji ?j6PY——iTii Tt o
Tho pppp ,,, as Asreen, Actin ;_, N lerk ( (
by :/ ,_,,__, /’..·
DGPMY Clerk p W Tssunn AS MANDA'I`E:p Mt; 2 62lm*

l§ 2255(motion, because “‘actual in11ocence’ means factual innocence, not mere legal insufficiency? 2
Sweet v. Bennett, 353 F.3d 135, 142 (2d Cir. 2003) (quoting Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614,
623 (1998)).
FOR THE COURT: 2
S 6 Catherine O’Hagan Wolfe, Clerk
By: .. 1 # .2 ~
l
saonwc 2 I t