Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Oct. 29, 2020

Speed v. United States

Judge
P. Castel
Docket
1:10-cv-03333
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Speed v. United States, Judge Castel granted Robert Speed a certificate of appealability after the court denied his sentence-challenge motion.

Who this affects

Robert Speed received permission to pursue an appeal of the denial of his sentence-challenge motion; the order did not itself provide relief from his sentence.

What happened

Speed v. United States concerns Robert Speed’s request to challenge his federal sentence under a procedure allowing a prisoner to seek correction of a sentence. The court had already denied that request.

Speed needed a certificate of appealability to appeal the denial. The court found that unsettled law after United States v. Davis justified finding that he had made the required substantial showing of a possible constitutional-right violation.

Judge Castel therefore granted Speed a certificate of appealability. This order did not grant relief from his sentence or decide that his challenge would succeed on appeal.

The detailed version

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

Case
Speed v. United States · No. 1:10-cv-03333
Judge
P. Castel
Date
Oct. 29, 2020

Background

Robert Speed sought relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, which allows a federal prisoner to ask the court that imposed the sentence to vacate, set aside, or correct it. The court had denied Speed’s § 2255 motion. This order addressed whether Speed could appeal that denial.

Certificate of Appealability

Under 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c), an appeal from a final order in a § 2255 case requires a certificate of appealability. The certificate is available when the applicant makes a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied.

The court found that the law remained unsettled after United States v. Davis concerning how to interpret general guilty verdicts under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) when the verdict rests on more than one possible predicate crime. Based on that uncertainty, the court found that Speed had made the required showing.

Disposition

The court granted Speed a certificate of appealability. The order did not vacate or change his sentence, and it did not decide whether Speed would prevail on appeal.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.