043771P.pdf   11/14/2005  Euka Wadlington  v.  USA
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  04-3771
   Southern District of Iowa   
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Lay and Fagg, Circuit Judges]
   Habeas Case - Motion to Vacate. Claims of actual innocence of
   conspiracy to distribute and attempted distribution charges based on post-
   trial affidavits recanting trial testimony was properly rejected by the
   district court. The affidavits do not entitled appellate review of barred
   claims; the statements did not establish actual innocence, contained
   corroboration supporting the convictions and did not constitute new
   reliable evidence. Further, defendant failed to show the government
   knew or should have know trial testimony was perjured. Claim of
   Apprendi and Blakely violations are reviewed for plain error because the
   district court should have reviewed the Apprendi claim. Reviewing for
   plain error, the court finds none, as the evidence overwhelmingly
   supported the adoption of the presentence investigation report's
   conclusion of drug quantity and life sentence.