Guerrier v. United States

Background

Edwin Guerrier, who was incarcerated at FCI Otisville, filed a self-represented motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 challenging the legality of his sentence. He had pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cocaine. Judgment was entered on September 24, 2020, and the Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction on March 2, 2022.

Judge Rakoff referred the motion to Magistrate Judge James L. Cott for a report and recommendation. Guerrier’s motion identified two grounds for relief: “sufficiency of evidence” and an “Eighth Amendment Claim.” The motion did not provide facts explaining either claim and left blank the question asking what relief he wanted.

Court’s Analysis

The court applied Rule 2(b) of the rules governing motions under § 2255. That rule requires a motion to identify all available grounds for relief, state the supporting facts, and specify the requested relief. The filing must give the court and the United States enough information to understand the legal claims and factual basis so the issues can be decided.

The court concluded that Guerrier’s motion did not comply with Rule 2(b) because it gave only the names of the two claims, without supporting facts, and did not state the requested relief. Because a person generally has only one opportunity to bring a § 2255 motion raising all grounds for relief from a judgment, the court allowed Guerrier to amend rather than immediately deny the motion.

Ruling and Effect

The court directed Guerrier to file an amended § 2255 motion within 60 days. The amended filing had to be captioned “Amended Motion,” use the same docket number, and explain the facts supporting both the Eighth Amendment claim and the insufficiency-of-evidence claim. No response from the United States was required at that time. The United States was ordered to file an answer or other response within 60 days after the amended motion was filed.

The order stated that if Guerrier did not comply within the allowed time and could not show good cause, the motion would be denied. The court also stated that no certificate of appealability would issue because Guerrier had not then made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied. It further certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying the required fees. Judge Rakoff was the referring district judge; the order was signed by Magistrate Judge James L. Cott.