United States v. Teran
3:07-cr-00177
D.S.C.Jan 3, 2013Background
- Defendant Emilio Bautista-Teran moved for a certificate of appealability in connection with his appeal following the denial of his §2255 motion.
- The district court had denied Bautista-Teran’s §2255 motion on November 12, 2009.
- The district court observed the appeal may be untimely and treated Bautista-Teran’s motion as a potential second or successive §2255 petition, which would fall under Fourth Circuit control.
- To the extent the motion is treated as a second or successive §2255 petition, the district court lacks jurisdiction and dismissed.
- To the extent the motion is treated as a certificate of appealability request, the standard requires a substantial showing of a constitutional denial under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c).
- The court denied a certificate of appealability, holding the standard was not met and the appeal was not timely or properly framed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the motion is a forbidden second/successive §2255 | Bautista-Teran seeks permission to file a successive §2255 motion | Court has no jurisdiction to entertain a successive §2255 petition | Dismissed for lack of jurisdiction |
| Whether a certificate of appealability should issue on the petition | Requests a COA under 28 U.S.C. §2253(c) | Standard not met; no substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right | COA denied |
Key Cases Cited
- Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322 (2003) (establishes substantial showing standard for COA)
- Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473 (2000) (clarifies COA standard and procedural considerations)
- Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676 (4th Cir. 2001) ( Fourth Circuit interpretation of COA eligibility)