Boykin v. United States

Background

The court had previously denied Boykin’s motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to set aside his conviction and sentence on Count Twenty-Five, a firearm offense under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). Boykin then filed a motion asking the court to reconsider that decision based on a later Second Circuit decision concerning how a jury must identify the offense supporting a § 924(c) conviction.

Boykin’s Argument and the Court’s Analysis

The later decision involved a defendant whose firearm conviction could have rested on either a racketeering conspiracy, which was no longer a qualifying crime of violence for this purpose, or a narcotics conspiracy, which was a qualifying drug-trafficking offense. Because the jury had not specified which offense supported the conviction, the Second Circuit found that the conviction could not necessarily be tied to a qualifying predicate.

The court distinguished Boykin’s case. Boykin had pleaded guilty rather than been convicted after a jury verdict, and he admitted during the plea proceeding that he committed the murder of Lamont Young. The indictment identified the conspiracy to murder Lamont Young and the actual murder as the predicate offenses for Count Twenty-Five. The court concluded that the admitted murder was a crime of violence under § 924(c)(3)(A), so the later Second Circuit decision did not provide a basis to change the earlier ruling.

Ruling

Judge McMahon denied Boykin’s motion for reconsideration. The court declined to issue a certificate of appealability because Boykin had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied. The court also found under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith.

Classification Basis

This is a procedural order because the court ruled on a motion to reconsider an earlier decision rather than making a new merits determination on the underlying § 2255 claim.