Ndukwe v. United States

Background

Patrick Ndukwe pleaded guilty to federal crimes related to Medicaid fraud and received a principal sentence of 60 months’ imprisonment on June 30, 2023. He did not appeal. On June 30, 2024, he filed a petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a procedure allowing a federal prisoner to challenge the legality of the conviction or sentence.

Ndukwe requested appointed counsel, but the court denied that request and allowed him to submit supporting arguments by September 13, 2024. The court said it would reconsider whether counsel was appropriate if he renewed the request in that filing. Ndukwe made no further submission. The court therefore addressed the petition and denied it on November 7, 2024. It also declined to issue a certificate of appealability, which is required for an appeal from the denial of a § 2255 petition.

Motion for reconsideration

Ndukwe moved for reconsideration. He made three arguments:

1. Effect of his appeal. Ndukwe argued that the court lacked authority to decide his petition because he had appealed the order denying appointed counsel. The court confirmed that the appeal, filed on August 30, remained pending. It nevertheless ruled that the appeal did not prevent the district court from deciding the petition because the appeal concerned only the appointed-counsel issue, not the aspects of the case involved in the petition’s merits.

2. Documents from former counsel. Ndukwe argued that he had not received complete discovery from his previously appointed trial counsel. The opinion describes communications between Ndukwe, his wife, and counsel, including delivery of documents to his wife’s home address. The court noted that Ndukwe did not say he failed to receive those materials and did not explain what additional materials he lacked or how they would have helped him prepare the petition.

3. Opportunity to address an appeal certificate. Ndukwe argued that the court should not have denied a certificate of appealability without giving him another opportunity to be heard. The court ruled that he had already been given an opportunity to supplement his petition by September 13 and chose not to do so. It concluded that he was not entitled to an additional opportunity.

Disposition

The court denied Ndukwe’s motion for reconsideration. It also stated that Ndukwe had not made the required substantial showing that a federal right had been denied, so a certificate of appealability would not be granted. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), the court further determined that an appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Ndukwe a copy of the order and record the mailing on the docket.

Classification

This is a procedural order because the court denied reconsideration of an earlier ruling rather than deciding a new underlying legal claim.