Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled July 22, 2020

Jean v. United States

Judge
Denny Chin
Docket
1:18-cv-02888-DC
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasPro SeCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jean v. United States, Judge Chin transferred Maxo Jean’s successive sentence challenge to the Second Circuit for permission review.

Who this affects

Maxo Jean, whose request was transferred to the Second Circuit for permission to file another sentence challenge; the district-court action was closed.

What happened

Jean v. United States concerns Maxo Jean’s request to have his sentence set aside or corrected. Jean was incarcerated, represented himself, and filed the request under a federal law allowing prisoners to challenge their sentences.

Jean argued that his sentence should be vacated because the record did not show that at least 12 people served on the grand jury that indicted him, which he said violated the Fifth Amendment. The court noted that Jean had already filed an earlier sentence challenge that it denied and later reaffirmed.

Judge Denny Chin transferred this matter to the Second Circuit to decide whether Jean may file another sentence challenge. The district court closed the case, said that no certificate allowing an appeal would issue, and denied fee-waiver status for any appeal.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Jean v. United States · No. 1:18-cv-02888-DC
Judge
Denny Chin
Date
July 22, 2020

Background

Maxo Jean, who was incarcerated in Philipsburg, Pennsylvania and proceeding without a lawyer, moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence in the underlying criminal case. The opinion states that the court had previously denied a § 2255 motion filed by Jean and reaffirmed that decision on January 23, 2020.

Jean’s Argument

Jean argued that his sentence should be vacated because there was no record showing that the grand jury that indicted him had at least 12 members. He contended that the alleged failure violated the Fifth Amendment.

Ruling

The court did not decide the merits of Jean’s grand-jury argument. It held that a defendant must obtain permission from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit before filing another § 2255 motion after an earlier one. Under 28 U.S.C. §§ 2255(h) and 1631, the court transferred the matter to the Second Circuit to decide whether to allow Jean to file another such motion.

The order closed the district-court action. It stated that, if the Second Circuit authorizes Jean to file a successive motion, he may ask to reopen the case under the civil docket number. The court also ruled that no certificate of appealability would issue because the motion did not make a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. In addition, it certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees for purposes of an appeal. Judge Denny Chin signed the order as a United States Circuit Judge sitting by designation.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.