Under 28 U.S.C. 2255, a federal criminal defendant can move in the district court to set aside his federal sentence. 2255 is often referred to as federal habeas and looked at as a cousin to 2254 petitions. Indeed, the statute itself does (sort of) refer to it as similar to an application for a writ of habeas corpus.
I usually don't talk about 2255 motions on the blog. Actually, I am not sure if I ever have.
Why not?
While they are often referred to as federal habeas petitions, they really aren't and are nearly irrelevant to federal habeas petitions challenging state court convictions, which is the focus of the blog. In reality, 2255 is basically the equivalent to a 440 motion in New York state court -- a post-conviction collateral proceeding before the same court as the conviction raising claims that were outside the record on the direct appeal. So it is a little different from a 2254 petition in nature.
2255 also does not have the AEDPA standard of review. So almost any decision on a substantive issue in a 2255 motion is essentially a criminal law decision, similar to a decision in a federal criminal case. Apart from the Supreme Court, a federal court's decision on an area of substantive criminal law is not relevant to a 2254 case.
On the other hand, there are some AEDPA-aspects to a 2255 motion that are similar to a 2254 petition. The COA requirement applies, as does the one-year statute of limitations. There is also the same restriction on second or successive motions.
So some procedural decisions on 2255 motions are relevant to 2254 petitions. Otherwise, not particularly relevant.
With that being said, I am going to briefly mention something about a 2255 motion. A reader pointed me to an article yesterday on LoHud.com (a website that covers the lower Hudson Valley) about a 2255 motion that was recently filed. Since it is so rare for a collateral proceeding in federal court to get some media attention, I thought I'd provide a link to the article.
It's entitled, "Mount Vernon man says new evidence clears him in extortion case."
Here are the opening paragraphs:
A Mount Vernon man serving 59 years in a federal prison for kidnapping, extortion and robbery says newly uncovered evidence warrants a new trial in the case.
Angelo DiPietro, 53, wants a federal judge to void his 2005 conviction because of what he says was the failure of prosecutors to disclose information about witnesses who could have helped him prove his innocence.
The rest of the article is here. It's an interesting article, worth the read.
Comments