United States v. Arthur William Mack

67 F.3d 310 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Arthur William MACK, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-30278. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Sept. 18, 1995. * Decided Sept. 25, 1995. Before: BROWNING, GOODWIN, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Federal prisoner Arthur William Mack appeals pro se the district court's denial of his second 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 motion as successive. Mack pled guilty to manufacturing marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. Sec. 841 (a)(1) and was sentenced to sixty-three months. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 2255 . We review for abuse of discretion, Campbell v. Blodgett, 997 F.2d 512, 516 (9th Cir.1992), cert. denied, 114 S.Ct. 1337 (1994), and affirm. 3 A section 2255 motion may be dismissed as successive if it presents the same ground previously determined on its merits adversely to petitioner and the ends of justice would not be…