Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Feb. 14, 2023

Northover v. United States

Judge
Kenneth Karas
Docket
7:22-cv-08944
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCivil ProcedurePro Se
In one sentence

In Northover v. United States, Judge Karas transferred Anthony Northover’s repeat challenge to the Second Circuit because appellate permission was required.

Who this affects

Anthony Northover, whose second motion challenging his federal conviction and sentence was transferred to the Second Circuit; the United States was the respondent.

What happened

In Northover v. United States, Anthony Northover, acting without a lawyer, challenged his federal conviction and sentence through a motion under a law allowing prisoners to seek relief from federal convictions and sentences.

The court found that Northover had already filed an earlier motion challenging the same conviction and sentence, and that the earlier motion had been decided on its merits. As a result, the new motion was a second filing of the same type, which required permission from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit before the district court could consider it.

Judge Kenneth M. Karas transferred the motion to the Second Circuit and closed the district-court case. The court also said that a certificate allowing an appeal would not issue and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.

The detailed version

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

Case
Northover v. United States · No. 7:22-cv-08944
Judge
Kenneth Karas
Date
Feb. 14, 2023

Background Anthony Northover, who was incarcerated at FCC Coleman and was proceeding without a lawyer, filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. That statute allows a federal prisoner to challenge a federal conviction or sentence. Northover sought to challenge his conviction and sentence in this case.

Court’s Analysis The court’s records showed that Northover had previously filed a § 2255 motion challenging the same conviction and sentence. The court stated that the earlier motion had been decided on its merits. Under the governing law, the new application was therefore a second or “successive” § 2255 motion.

Before a successive § 2255 motion may be filed in the district court, the applicant must obtain authorization from the appropriate federal appeals court. The court therefore determined that Northover had to seek permission from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit before pursuing the motion in the district court.

Disposition In the interest of justice, the court transferred the § 2255 motion 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 Northover to proceed, he may ask to reopen the case under the same civil docket number.

The court also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because the motion did not make 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 filing fees. The court did not decide the merits of Northover’s challenge to his conviction or sentence.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-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.