Cox v. United States
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 5934
| 2d Cir. | 2015Background
- Clinton D. Cox was convicted in 2001 on federal narcotics and firearms charges; convictions and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal.
- After Watson, the district court vacated Cox’s firearms convictions and resentenced him on narcotics counts to concurrent 360-month terms; that resentencing was affirmed.
- In October 2011 Cox filed a § 2255 motion challenging his narcotics convictions, asserting prosecutorial misconduct, false witness testimony, and ineffective assistance of trial, appellate, and resentencing counsel for failing to pursue/disclose exculpatory evidence.
- The district court denied the § 2255 petition, reasoning in part that many claims related only to the original sentencing and were time- or procedurally barred; Cox appealed and sought Certificates of Appealability (COAs).
- The Second Circuit considered (1) whether the district court’s order was a final, appealable judgment, and (2) whether Cox made the requisite substantial showing to obtain COAs on his constitutional claims.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Appellate jurisdiction — finality of district court order | Cox treated district court’s denial of §2255 as final and appealable | Government: order dismissing petition is final; appraisal needed | Court: order was a final decision under 28 U.S.C. §1291; jurisdiction exists |
| Whether Polansky controls when rationale is erroneous | Cox implied dismissal improper because some reasoning was incorrect | Gov: district court clearly intended to dispose of petition in full | Held: Polansky limited; where court intended full dismissal, order is final despite flawed reasoning |
| Procedural/time bars to claims (discovery/prosecution nondisclosure) | Cox argued government withheld exculpatory evidence and witness perjured himself | District court found no evidence supporting withheld-investigation or perjury claims; some claims were known at trial and thus forfeited | Held: many claims procedurally barred or lacking factual support; Bousley standard applies and Cox failed to show cause/prejudice or actual innocence |
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (trial, appellate, resentencing) | Cox: counsel failed to investigate/challenge allegedly false testimony and nondisclosure | Gov: ineffective-assistance claims depend on underlying factual allegations which district court found baseless | Held: Cox failed to make a substantial showing of deprivation of a constitutional right; COAs denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay, 437 U.S. 463 (principle defining a "final" decision)
- Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229 (definition of finality)
- Polansky v. Pfizer, Inc., 762 F.3d 160 (2d Cir.) (when an order is not final because intent to dismiss entirely is unclear)
- Massaro v. United States, 538 U.S. 500 (ineffective-assistance claims may be raised on collateral review)
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (standard for COA: jurists of reason could disagree)
- Bousley v. United States, 523 U.S. 614 (cause-and-prejudice and actual-innocence gateways for procedurally defaulted claims)
- Watson v. United States, 552 U.S. 74 (grounding decision that led district court to vacate firearms convictions)
- Vu v. United States, 648 F.3d 111 (resentencing after §2255 does not make a later §2255 "second or successive")
- Campusano v. United States, 442 F.3d 770 (standard of review for §2255 appeals)