Narrative Opinion Summary
Dale Hendrickson filed a pro se motion for a certificate of appealability regarding a district court order that dismissed his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate his conviction as untimely and denied his motion for the recusal of the district judge. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit partially granted his motion. It vacated the district court's order concerning the denial of his motion to set aside the judgment of conviction and remanded the case. The appellate court instructed the district court to inform Hendrickson that his motion would be treated as a § 2255 motion and to provide him with an opportunity to demonstrate why this motion should not be considered time-barred under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act. The appeal for other aspects of the certificate of appealability was denied.
Legal Issues Addressed
Recusal of District Judgesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Hendrickson's motion for the recusal of the district judge was denied, and this aspect of his appeal was not granted by the appellate court.
Reasoning: The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit partially granted his motion. The appeal for other aspects of the certificate of appealability was denied.
Timeliness of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court vacated the district court's order regarding the untimeliness of Hendrickson's motion and remanded the case for further proceedings to address the issue of timeliness.
Reasoning: It vacated the district court's order concerning the denial of his motion to set aside the judgment of conviction and remanded the case.
Treatment of Motions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court ordered the district court to inform Hendrickson that his motion would be treated as a § 2255 motion and to allow him to argue against its time-barred status.
Reasoning: The appellate court instructed the district court to inform Hendrickson that his motion would be treated as a § 2255 motion and to provide him with an opportunity to demonstrate why this motion should not be considered time-barred under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act.