United States v. Sampson
2012 WL 1633296
D. Mass.2012Background
- In 2003 a jury unanimously sentenced Sampson to death for two carjackings resulting in deaths.
- Sampson sought a new sentencing hearing under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 after appeals failed.
- The court found a juror lied per McDonough about impartiality, warranting a new sentencing hearing.
- The court vacated the death sentence and ordered a second sentencing hearing.
- The government sought to appeal the jury claim order and possible § 1292(b) certification; the court stayed proceedings.
- The court certified questions under § 1292(b) and stayed the case pending First Circuit review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether McDonough requires actual or implied bias for relief | Sampson argues McDonough requires bias proof | Sampson argues McDonough does not require bias proof | McDonough does not require bias proof for relief |
| Whether the jury claim decision is final or interlocutory | Government seeks immediate appeal | Court considered it interlocutory but certifies § 1292(b) | Court allows potential interlocutory appeal under § 1292(b) |
| Whether §1292(b) applies to §2255 proceedings | Note to Rule 1 treats §2255 as continuation of criminal case | §1292(b) applicability is plausible in civil-like §2255 context | The court finds §1292(b) applicable in extraordinary circumstances |
| Whether the court should certify questions for interlocutory appeal | Government seeks certification of McDonough issues | Court weighs exceptional circumstances | Certification of two McDonough-related questions granted |
Key Cases Cited
- McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. Greenwood, 464 U.S. 548 (1984) (test for relief when juror lies about impartiality varies by context)
- Andrews v. United States, 373 U.S. 334 (1963) (interlocutory appeal of §2255 resentencing order; final disposition pending resentencing)
- United States v. Hammer, 564 F.3d 628 (3d Cir. 2009) (interlocutory appeal in §2255 capital case context)
- United States v. Stitt, 459 F.3d 483 (4th Cir. 2006) (interlocutory appeal issues in §2255 capital case)
- Amirault v. Fair, 968 F.2d 1404 (1st Cir. 1992) (First Circuit on McDonough interpretation)
- Dall v. Coffin, 970 F.2d 964 (1st Cir. 1992) (support for McDonough framework)
- Greer v. United States, 285 F.3d 158 (2d Cir. 2002) (discussion of inferable bias under McDonough)
- Torres v. United States, 128 F.3d 38 (2d Cir. 1997) (concept of inferable bias)