Sanchez v. United States
- Paul Crotty
- 1:18-cv-00206-PAC
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Sanchez v. United States, Judge Crotty ruled that no certificate of appealability would issue for Sanchez’s Rule 60(b) motion.
Edgar Marino Sanchez, whose request for a certificate of appealability was denied.
What happened
Edgar Marino Sanchez asked the court to reconsider its earlier decision on his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a law allowing a federal prisoner to challenge a sentence. The court had denied that reconsideration request on May 1, 2020.
The court had previously denied Sanchez’s request for a certificate of appealability, which is required to appeal the denial of a § 2255 petition. The Second Circuit affirmed that denial in August 2019.
Judge Paul A. Crotty ruled that Sanchez had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The court therefore stated that a certificate of appealability would not issue.
The detailed version
- Sanchez v. United States · No. 1:18-cv-00206-PAC
- Paul Crotty
- Sept. 9, 2020
Background
Edgar Marino Sanchez was the petitioner in a proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The opinion states that the court had issued an earlier “Opinion & Order” on his § 2255 petition and that Sanchez later moved under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(1) for reconsideration of that decision. The court denied the reconsideration motion on May 1, 2020.
The opinion also states that the court had previously denied Sanchez’s motion for a certificate of appealability concerning his § 2255 petition. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed that denial in August 2019.
Ruling
Judge Paul A. Crotty stated that Sanchez had not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right in his Rule 60(b) motion. Citing 28 U.S.C. § 2253, the court ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue.
Disposition
The order does not alter the earlier denial of Sanchez’s Rule 60(b)(1) reconsideration motion or the prior denial of a certificate of appealability. The opinion’s stated action is that a certificate of appealability will not issue.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.