- 3 -Hyatt’s conviction and life sentence were affirmed by theSixth Circuit Court of Appeals (C.A. No. 94-3133) on or aboutSeptember 9, 1995.
On May 4, 1998, Hyatt filed a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 2255 to vacate his conviction and sentence. The district courtdismissed the motion as time-barred under The Anti-TerrorismandEffective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA). Hyatt appealed thedistrict court’s ruling (C.A. No. 98-4229). On March 27, 2000,the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court inall respects. See United States v. Hyatt, 207 F.3d 831 (6
Cir.2000).On or about February 2, 2001, Hyatt filed a motion with theSixth Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, docketed as C.A. No. 01-3011, seeking authority to assert various claims based onApprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000). OnOctober 30, 2001, the Circuit Court denied Hyatt’s motion.On June 23, 2003, Hyatt filed another motion with the SixthCircuit (C.A. No. 03-3680), again requesting authorization toassert his Apprendi claims in the district court pursuant to 28U.S.C. § 2255 ¶6(3), or in the alternative, in a second and
Hyatt’s life sentence was not the result of a statutorilyrequired penalty; rather, it was based upon a U.S.S.G.computation which resulted in the maximumTotal Offense Level of 43 (actually the offense level was initially computed as a Level46).
Case: 5:93-cr-00237-DDD Doc #: 384 Filed: 08/14/13 3 of 14. PageID #: 370