United States v. Arrendondo-Valenzuela
692 F. App'x 504
10th Cir.2017Background
- In 2009 Arrendondo-Valenzuela pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute ≥50 g methamphetamine and was sentenced to 360 months.
- He waived appeal in his plea agreement; the direct appeal was dismissed on the government’s motion to enforce that waiver.
- His first § 2255 motion was denied; in 2016 he filed a second § 2255 motion invoking Johnson v. United States.
- The district court dismissed the 2016 filing as an unauthorized second or successive § 2255 motion for which Arrendondo-Valenzuela needed authorization from the Tenth Circuit, and declined to transfer the motion.
- Arrendondo-Valenzuela sought a certificate of appealability (COA) to challenge the dismissal; he did not explain why the district court erred in treating the filing as second or successive and did not develop a Johnson-based argument on appeal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred by dismissing the 2016 § 2255 motion as an unauthorized second or successive petition | The filing should be considered on the merits (asserts ineffective assistance and sentencing error; underlying § 2255 relied on Johnson) | District court lacks jurisdiction over a second or successive § 2255; authorization must come from the court of appeals | Dismissal upheld; no debatable procedural error — COA denied |
| Whether a COA should issue where dismissal was on procedural grounds | COA request argues entitlement to review of his claims | Government argues procedural requirements for COA under Slack were not met | COA denied because plaintiff failed to show the district court’s procedural ruling was debatable |
Key Cases Cited
- Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015) (new rule regarding scope of the residual clause under the ACCA)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (standards for issuing a certificate of appealability when a petition is dismissed on procedural grounds)
- United States v. Harper, 545 F.3d 1230 (10th Cir. 2008) (COA required to appeal district court § 2255 dismissal)
- In re Cline, 531 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2008) (district courts lack jurisdiction over second or successive § 2255 claims absent court-of-appeals authorization)
- Garza v. Davis, 596 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2010) (pro se filings entitled to liberal construction)