Thurmond v. United States
- Kimba Wood
- 1:23-cv-11197
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Thurmond v. United States, Judge Wood denied Thurmond’s motion without prejudice because his direct appeal was pending.
Tyrone Thurmond’s motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 was denied without prejudice while his direct appeal was pending; the order also denied a certificate of appealability and permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
What happened
In Thurmond v. United States, Tyrone Thurmond asked the court to set aside his conviction and sentence through a motion under a federal law, 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He filed the motion after judgment and then filed a direct appeal.
The court said the motion was premature because the direct appeal was still pending. Although the court could consider the motion, it decided that doing so could create confusion, waste judicial resources, or lead to a decision made ineffective by the appeal’s result.
Judge Kimba M. Wood denied the § 2255 motion without prejudice as premature. The court also said no certificate allowing an appeal would issue and denied permission to appeal without paying filing fees.
The detailed version
- Thurmond v. United States · No. 1:23-cv-11197
- Kimba Wood
- Dec. 28, 2023
Background
Tyrone Thurmond moved under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his conviction and sentence entered in the related criminal case. He filed the motion on December 17, 2023. Five days later, he filed a notice of direct appeal, and the Clerk of Court transmitted the notice and record to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit on December 26, 2023.
Reason for the ruling
The court treated the § 2255 motion as premature because Thurmond’s direct appeal was pending. The court noted that a pending appeal did not strictly prohibit it from deciding the motion. But it concluded that judicial economy favored waiting because having the same issues before two courts could cause confusion or waste time, and the direct appeal could make this court’s decision ineffective.
Disposition
Judge Kimba M. Wood denied the motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 without prejudice as premature. The order did not decide the merits of Thurmond’s challenge to his conviction or sentence. The court also ruled that a certificate of appealability would not issue because the motion made no 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.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.