Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 1, 2022

Graham v. United States

Judge
Nelson Roman
Docket
7:19-cv-09629
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCriminalPro Se
In one sentence

In Graham v. United States, Judge Roman denied an appeal certificate and fee-free appeal status after the court denied Graham’s challenge to his conviction.

Who this affects

Clydedoro Graham, who represented himself and sought to appeal the denial of his challenge to his conviction; the order denied him a certificate of appealability and permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

What happened

In Graham v. United States, Clydedoro Graham, representing himself, asked the court to set aside his conviction based on ineffective assistance of counsel. The court had previously denied that request, finding his allegations about his lawyer’s performance conclusory and insufficient.

This order addresses whether Graham could appeal that decision with a certificate of appealability, a document required for this type of appeal. The court found that Graham had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied.

Judge Nelson S. Roman therefore declined to issue a certificate of appealability and certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith. The court also denied Graham permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Graham v. United States · No. 7:19-cv-09629
Judge
Nelson Roman
Date
Aug. 1, 2022

Background

Clydedoro Graham, proceeding without a lawyer, challenged his conviction under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a federal procedure that allows a person in federal custody to seek relief from a conviction or sentence. He claimed that his lawyer provided ineffective assistance.

In an earlier opinion and order dated February 8, 2022, the court denied Graham’s § 2255 motion without holding an evidentiary hearing. The court concluded that Graham had not shown that his lawyer’s performance was deficient because his allegations were conclusory and insufficient.

Rulings in This Order

The court considered whether to issue a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability is required to appeal the denial of certain federal post-conviction motions. The court concluded that Graham had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right had been denied, and it therefore did not issue the certificate.

The court also certified under 18 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that an appeal from the order would not be taken in good faith. It consequently denied Graham permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The Clerk of Court was directed to mail Graham a copy of the order and record service on the docket.

Disposition

The order denied a certificate of appealability and denied fee-free status for an appeal. It did not revisit or change the court’s earlier denial of Graham’s § 2255 motion. Judge Nelson S. Roman signed the order.

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.