McDonald v. US
Split Score
What is a Split Score?
This score (0-100) indicates how likely this case is to be reviewed by the Supreme Court based on:
Case Summary
Disposition
Affirmed
The First Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of habeas relief and refusal to resentence Matthew McDonald after the court had already corrected his Armed Career Criminal Act sentence. The panel held that the erroneous jury instruction on a now-invalid § 924(c) predicate was harmless and that McDonald failed to make a substantial, debatable constitutional showing warranting a COA on his request for a full resentencing.
Circuit Split Identified
Legal Issue
Whether a federal prisoner who wishes to challenge the district court’s choice of remedy under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 must (a) file a notice of appeal from the amended criminal judgment or (b) obtain a certificate of appealability (COA) from the court of appeals.
Circuit Positions
A COA is required before a prisoner may appeal the district court’s selection of a § 2255 remedy.
A notice of appeal from the amended criminal judgment suffices; no COA is required.
Declines to decide; assumes arguendo that a COA is required but resolves appeal on other grounds.
Conflict Summary
The Third and Eleventh Circuits require a certificate of appealability to review a district court’s remedial choice under § 2255, whereas the Fourth and Sixth Circuits treat the matter as part of the criminal judgment and require only a notice of appeal. The First Circuit, in this opinion, expressly acknowledged the split but declined to decide the question, assuming arguendo that a COA was required and finding the standard unmet.