United States v. Chon

Summary

The Tenth Circuit denied a certificate of appealability, holding that the district court properly dismissed a § 2241 habeas application as an unauthorized second or successive § 2255 motion challenging a pseudoephedrine conviction under the Ex Post Facto Clause. The court emphasized that the relief sought, not the pleading title, determines whether a filing is a § 2255 motion, and that § 2255(h) and § 2244(b) clearly foreclose jurisdiction over such unauthorized filings, rejecting the argument that the *Califano v. Sanders* presumption of judicial review applies to overcome the statutory bar.

Holdings

1. The district court correctly determined that the filing must be treated as a second or successive § 2255 motion because it sought relief from conviction on constitutional grounds, and the court lacked jurisdiction to consider it without authorization from the circuit court.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court correctly determined that Mr. Chon's filing must be treated as a second or successive § 2255 motion and dismissed it for lack of jurisdiction.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion by dismissing rather than transferring the filing to this court for authorization.
3. Whether Mr. Chon is entitled to a certificate of appealability.

Disposition

dismissed