Jaramillo v. United States
- 1:20-cv-03570-LTS
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Jaramillo v. United States, the court denied Pedro Jaramillo’s post-conviction motion and hearing request and declined an appeal certificate.
Pedro Jaramillo’s post-conviction challenge was denied, and the United States prevailed in this proceeding. The case was closed, and no certificate of appealability was issued.
What happened
In Jaramillo v. United States, Pedro Jaramillo asked the court to set aside or correct his federal criminal judgment under a law allowing post-conviction challenges. The judgment refers to a memorandum order dated December 16, 2022, but does not state the motion’s specific claims or arguments.
The court denied Jaramillo’s post-conviction motion in its entirety and denied his request for an evidentiary hearing because the existing record was sufficient to decide the motion. The court also declined to issue a certificate required for an appeal, certified that an appeal would not be taken in good faith, closed the case, and deemed pending motions moot.
The court, whose individual judge is not identified in the provided judgment, entered the judgment on December 19, 2022. The judgment does not explain the memorandum order’s reasoning or identify the specific legal issues decided.
The detailed version
- Jaramillo v. United States · No. 1:20-cv-03570-LTS
- Dec. 19, 2022
Background
Pedro Jaramillo, identified as the petitioner, filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a federal procedure for challenging a federal criminal conviction or sentence after judgment. The United States of America was the respondent. The judgment states that the court’s reasons appear in a memorandum order dated December 16, 2022, but that memorandum order is not included in the provided text.
Rulings
The court denied Jaramillo’s § 2255 motion in its entirety. It also denied his request for an evidentiary hearing, finding that the record was sufficient for the factual determinations needed to resolve the motion.
The court declined to issue a certificate of appealability. The judgment states that such a certificate is required before Jaramillo may appeal and that he would not be able to meet the required showing. The court also certified under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal would not be taken in good faith.
Effect of the Judgment
The judgment resolved docket entry number 1 in the civil case, closed the case, and declared any pending motions moot. Because the memorandum order is not provided, the judgment alone does not disclose the specific claims or legal reasoning underlying the denial.
Classification note
This is classified as a substantive ruling because the court denied a motion challenging a federal criminal conviction or sentence after stating that the record was sufficient to make the factual determinations necessary to resolve it. The specific merits analysis, however, is not available in the provided text.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.