United States v. Cordova-Ordaz
637 F. App'x 523
10th Cir.2016Background
- Cordova-Ordaz pled guilty to possession with intent to distribute over 500 g of cocaine in the Western District of Texas in 2010; sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment followed by four years’ supervised release.
- Supervisory jurisdiction for his term of supervised release was transferred to the District of New Mexico in 2014.
- In 2015, NM district court revoked his supervised release and imposed a four-month sentence concurrent with another NM case.
- Cordova-Ordaz filed a § 2255 motion in NM challenging the Texas conviction and sentence in 2015.
- NM district court denied the motion for lack of jurisdiction under § 2255(a), and Cordova-Ordaz challenged that ruling on appeal.
- The court reviews whether a COA should issue and whether the district court correctly dismissed the § 2255 motion on procedural grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the COA should issue given procedural dismissal | Cordova-Ordaz argues for debatable merits of his claim | The district court correctly applied jurisdictional limitations | No; COA denied, district court dismissal affirmed |
| Whether the first court retains jurisdiction for a § 2255 attack after transfer | Cordova-Ordaz contends NM may hear the attack | First court maintains exclusive jurisdiction | No; first court retains exclusive jurisdiction over § 2255 attacking underlying conviction and sentence |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Condit, 621 F.2d 1096 (10th Cir. 1980) (jurisdiction lies only in the court which imposed the sentence)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (Supreme Court 2000) (debatable whether petition states denial of constitutional right and district court was correct)