Carranza v. United States, No. 12-334 (2d Cir. 2015)
Annotate this CasePetitioner pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine in 2009 and was sentenced to 151 months' imprisonment. Petitioner seeks leave to file a successive 28 U.S.C. 2255 motion raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court held that, although petitioner's section 2255 motion challenging the legality of his 2009 conviction and sentence was previously denied on the merits, his proposed section 2255 motion is not “second or successive” under 28 U.S.C. 2255(h) because it seeks only to reinstate his direct-appeal rights and therefore does not challenge the legality of the sentence imposed. Accordingly, the court denied the successive motion as unnecessary and transferred the matter to the district court with instructions that petitioner's section 2255 motion be accepted for filing.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.