Sankara v. Martuscellor
- Alison Nathan
- 1:18-cv-06308
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Sankara v. Martuscellor, Judge Nathan denied reconsideration of Sankara’s habeas ruling because he challenged another court’s order and showed no extraordinary circumstances.
Ahmadou Sankara, whose motion for reconsideration was denied and whose case was closed; the court also denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees on appeal.
What happened
Ahmadou Sankara was convicted in New York of possessing forged instruments and filed a petition challenging his conviction. The court previously denied that petition, and the Second Circuit later denied his request for permission to appeal and dismissed the appeal as moot.
Sankara then asked the court to reconsider, referring to the Second Circuit’s order. The court said it could not change another court’s judgment and that Sankara had not shown the exceptional circumstances required to reopen the court’s own judgment.
Judge Alison J. Nathan denied the motion for reconsideration. The clerk was directed to issue judgment and close the case, and the court denied permission to proceed without paying filing fees on appeal after finding that an appeal would not be taken in good faith.
The detailed version
- Sankara v. Martuscellor · No. 1:18-cv-06308
- Alison Nathan
- May 31, 2022
Background
Ahmadou Sankara was arrested in New York on March 6, 2015, for possessing forged bank cards. He was convicted on December 9, 2015, of three counts of second-degree criminal possession of a forged instrument. On June 14, 2018, Sankara filed a petition without a lawyer under 28 U.S.C. § 2254, challenging his conviction on several grounds.
A magistrate judge recommended denying all of Sankara’s claims. On November 19, 2020, the district court adopted that recommendation and denied the petition. Sankara later sought permission to appeal in the Second Circuit. On January 27, 2022, that court denied the request and dismissed the appeal as moot. Sankara then filed the motion for reconsideration addressed in this order.
Motion for Reconsideration
The court denied the motion. To the extent Sankara sought reconsideration of the Second Circuit’s mootness decision, the court held that it could not reconsider or modify a judgment issued by a different court.
To the extent Sankara sought reconsideration of the district court’s own judgment because of the Second Circuit’s dismissal, the court held that the motion was governed by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b). More than one year had passed since the denial of habeas relief, making the time limits for relief under Rule 60(b)(1) through (3) applicable. The court said Sankara had not alleged that the judgment was void, had been based on a reversed or vacated earlier judgment, or could no longer be applied fairly. He therefore had to show extraordinary circumstances under Rule 60(b)(6), but the court found that he had not done so.
Disposition
Judge Alison J. Nathan denied Sankara’s motion for reconsideration. The clerk was directed to mail him the order, issue judgment, and close the case. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith, and permission to proceed without paying filing fees was denied.
Classification basis
This is a procedural order because the court denied reconsideration based on the limits of its authority and Sankara’s failure to satisfy Rule 60(b); it did not decide the underlying habeas claims again.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.