Hutchings von Ludwitz v. United States

940 F.2d 1534 Unpublished Disposition NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. William E. HUTCHINGS VON LUDWITZ, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Fred J. Stock, Warden, Respondents-Appellees. No. 90-35709. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted July 29, 1991. * Decided Aug. 2, 1991. Before FARRIS, ALARCON and THOMAS G. NELSON, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 William E. Hutchings von Ludwitz, a federal prisoner, appeals pro se the district court's dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion as successive. We review de novo, United States v. Angelone, 894 F.2d 1129, 1130 (9th Cir.1990), and we affirm. 3 A district court may dismiss a section 2255 motion, without a hearing, on the basis of a prior adjudication only if: "(1) the same ground presented in the subsequent application was determined adversely to the applicant on the prior application, (2) the prior determination was on the merits, and (3) the ends of justice would not be…