Maldonado v. United States

Background

Edwin Maldonado submitted an application without a lawyer challenging the legality of the sentence imposed in his criminal case. He identified Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) as the basis for relief and later submitted two supplemental letters seeking substantially the same relief. The United States filed a response after the court requested one.

Designation under Section 2255

The court held that Maldonado’s application had to be treated as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because he sought to modify his sentence. Section 2255 is the federal procedure generally used by a federal prisoner to challenge a conviction or sentence. The court explained that Rule 60(b) is a civil-procedure rule and cannot be used to reopen or challenge a criminal judgment.

The court therefore designated the application as a § 2255 motion. It gave Maldonado until September 10, 2021, to notify the court in writing if he wished to withdraw it. If he did not do so, the application would remain designated as a § 2255 motion. The court stated that it expected to consider, among other issues, the United States’ argument that the challenge was barred by the filing deadline. The order did not resolve that argument or the merits of Maldonado’s sentence challenge.

Appeal-related rulings

The court concluded that Maldonado had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied, so it ordered that no certificate of appealability would issue. A certificate of appealability is required for an appeal from certain federal post-conviction proceedings. The court also certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

Disposition

The application was designated as a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. The order did not grant or deny § 2255 relief on the merits. The court denied a certificate of appealability and denied fee-free appeal status, and directed the Clerk to mail the order to Maldonado.