Hizbullahankhamon v. Yehl
- Laura Swain
- 1:22-cv-07991
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Hizbullahankhamon v. Yehl, Judge Swain denied Rule 60(b) relief and transferred the successive habeas application to the Second Circuit.
The order affects Qabail Hizbullahankhamon, who must obtain authorization from the Second Circuit to pursue this challenge to his state conviction. The respondent is identified as C. Yehl, superintendent of Wende Correctional Facility of New York State.
What happened
Qabail Hizbullahankhamon, who is incarcerated at Wende Correctional Facility, challenged his 1988 New York conviction in a self-represented application. He had previously challenged the same conviction in a related proceeding, which was decided on the merits.
The court treated the filing as a request under Rule 60(b), a rule allowing relief from certain court judgments, but denied that request because Hizbullahankhamon challenged his conviction rather than the fairness of the earlier federal habeas proceeding. The court then treated the filing as a new petition under the federal law for challenging a state conviction. Because it was a second or successive petition, permission from the Second Circuit was required before it could proceed.
The court transferred the application to the Second Circuit, closed the case, and said Hizbullahankhamon could ask to reopen it if that court authorized the petition. Judge Laura Taylor Swain also declined to issue a certificate of appealability and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
The detailed version
- Hizbullahankhamon v. Yehl · No. 1:22-cv-07991
- Laura Swain
- Sept. 20, 2022
Background
Qabail Hizbullahankhamon, proceeding without a lawyer, filed an application under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b) and 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenging his August 8, 1988 conviction in New York Supreme Court, Bronx County. The opinion states that he previously filed a § 2254 petition challenging the same conviction and that the earlier petition was dismissed on the merits and affirmed on appeal.
Rule 60(b) Request
A Rule 60(b) motion can provide relief from a judgment in certain circumstances. The court explained that, in this setting, such relief is available only when the motion challenges the integrity of the earlier federal habeas proceeding, rather than the underlying criminal conviction. Because Hizbullahankhamon challenged the conviction itself, the court denied his request for relief under Rule 60(b).
Second or Successive Petition
The court construed the application as a petition under § 2254 because it challenged a state-court conviction. A petition is “second or successive” when an earlier petition challenging the same conviction was decided on the merits. The court determined that this application met that description. Under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A), Hizbullahankhamon therefore had to obtain authorization from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit before filing the petition in the district court.
The opinion states that an authorization request must show either a previously unavailable new constitutional rule made retroactive by the Supreme Court, or newly discoverable facts that, if proven, would establish by clear and convincing evidence that no reasonable factfinder would have found the petitioner guilty absent a constitutional error.
Disposition
In the interest of justice, the court transferred the application, construed as a § 2254 petition, to the Second Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1631. The order closed the district-court case. It stated that, if the Second Circuit authorizes the application, Hizbullahankhamon may move to reopen this case under the same civil docket number.
The court also determined that Hizbullahankhamon had not made the required substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied, so it did not issue a certificate of appealability. It further certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees. The transfer and related rulings were entered by Chief United States District Judge Laura Taylor Swain.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.