United States v. Corey Hines

Corey Louis Hines appeals following the district court’s 1 order dismissing without prejudice his motion to correct his sentence, purportedly pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 52(b). Because Mr. Hines’s motion was at least his second collateral attack on his sentence, and Mr. Hines did not obtain this court’s authorization before filing the motion, it was the functional equivalent of an unauthorized successive section 2255 motion, and the district court properly dismissed it. See United States v. Patton, 309 F.3d 1093, 1094 (8th Cir.2002) (prisoners may not bypass authorization…