United States v. Winkles

Defendant filed a Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment following the denial of his section 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. The court concluded that a certificate of appealability (COA) is required to appeal the denial of a legitimate Rule 60(b) motion for relief from judgment arising out of the denial of a 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion; a COA should only issue for the appeal arising from the denial of a Rule 60(b) motion in a section 2255 proceeding if the movant shows that (1) jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court abused its discretion in denying the Rule 60(b) motion and (2) jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the underlying section 2255 motion states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right; and, in this case, defendant is not entitled to a COA where the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to reopen the time for appeal and the district court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to consider defendant's amended section 2255 motion. Accordingly, the court denied the COA and dismissed the appeal. View "United States v. Winkles" on Justia Law