Reyes Trujillo v. Houston

Background

Amado Reyes Trujillo, proceeding without a lawyer, filed a federal petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging a 2003 conviction from the Santa Clara County Superior Court. The court had already dismissed this action because Trujillo had previously litigated a federal habeas petition challenging the same conviction and therefore needed authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit before filing another petition.

Trujillo then filed a document titled “Request a Review.” The court interpreted it as a motion for reconsideration under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e) or 60(b). The motion presented an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim that had been included in the petition in this action, but it did not identify a legal or factual error in the dismissal order.

Court’s Analysis

The court held that the motion was not timely under Rule 59(e), which requires a reconsideration motion to be filed within 28 days after the judgment or order. The dismissal was issued on January 3, 2020, and the motion was deemed filed on February 18, 2020.

The court also found no valid basis for relief under Rule 60(b). Trujillo did not identify newly discovered evidence, mistake, inadvertence, surprise, excusable neglect, fraud, a void judgment, or another reason—such as extraordinary circumstances—that would justify reopening the judgment.

The court explained that a Rule 60(b) motion may not be used to evade the federal restriction on second or successive habeas petitions. A legitimate Rule 60(b) motion attacks a defect in the federal habeas proceeding, while a successive petition raises a federal basis for relief from the state conviction. Because Trujillo’s motion raised an ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim rather than challenging a defect in the federal proceeding, the court determined that it was in the nature of a successive petition.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3), Trujillo could not file such a petition in the district court unless the Ninth Circuit first authorized it. The record did not show that he had obtained that authorization.

Disposition

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers denied the motion for reconsideration. The order states that the denial was without prejudice to Trujillo seeking permission from the Ninth Circuit to file a successive habeas petition. The court also stated that a certificate of appealability would not issue, directed the Clerk to mail Trujillo an application form for permission to file a second or successive petition, and terminated Docket No. 16.

Classification

This is a procedural order. The court ruled on whether reconsideration was available and whether Trujillo had obtained the authorization required for a successive petition; it did not decide the merits of his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim.