Opinion
18-cv-6308 (AJN)
03-14-2023
Ahmadou Sankara, Petitioner, v. Daniel F. Martuscellor et al., Respondents.
ORDER
ALISON J. NATHAN, CIRCUIT JUDGE, SITTING BY DESIGNATION:
The Court has received the attached filing from Petitioner Ahmadou Sankara, including a motion to set aside the judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b)(4)-(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as well as requests to “[r]esubmit[]” the motion and for the appointment of counsel. For the reasons that follow, his requests are DENIED.
The Court denied Mr. Sankara's petition for the writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254 on November 19, 2020, Sankara v. Martuscellor, No. 18-CV-6308 (AJN), 2020 WL 6807079 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 19, 2020) (Dkt. No. 70), and denied Mr. Sankara's prior Rule 60(b) motion on May 31, 2022, Sankara v. Martuscellor, No. 18-CV-6308 (AJN), 2022 WL 2119300 (S.D.N.Y. May 31, 2022) (Dkt. No. 79).
As the Court explained in denying Mr. Sankara's prior Rule 60(b) motion, “Petitioner does not allege that the district court's decision is void, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(4), or . . . is based on an earlier judgment that has been reversed or vacated, or that it can no longer be prospectively applied equitably, see Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(5), so Petitioner must demonstrate that extraordinary circumstances warrant relief, to satisfy Rule 60(b)(6).” Sankara, 2022 WL 2119300, at *1 (cleaned up). Because Mr. Sankara's new filings also do not identify extraordinary circumstances warranting relief under Rule 60(b)(6), his motion must be denied. For the same reasons, Mr. Sankara has not shown that his claims are likely to be of substance, so his request for the appointment of counsel is denied. See Bonie v. Annucci, No. 19-CV-11822 (AJN) (DF), 2020 WL 1233555, at *1-2 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2020).
The Court certifies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3), that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith and therefore IFP status is denied for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to mail a copy of this Order to Mr. Sankara and to note the mailing on the public docket.
SO ORDERED.
MOTION FOR RESUMITTED
HON. ALISON J NATHAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.
Petitioner Ahmadou Sankara Respectfully Submitted a Motion To The Court. I Submitted a motion to the court since July 4,2022,1 never receive this court reply, I am Resubmitted same motion to the court on Feb 19, 2023, for the Record, for this criminal matter,
CC: James F. Gibbons Office
Assistant Attorney General
New York. NY 10005
CC; To Second Circuit Court Of Appeals
40 Foley Square New York . N Y 10007
Feb 19,2023
MOTION FOR FEDERAL CIVIL RULES 60 (b)(4)(6)
Hon. ALISON J NATHAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.
Petitioner Ahmadou Sankara Respectfully Submitted a Motion To The Court For Federal Civil Procedure Rules 60 (b)(4)-(6), By Replly This Court Order Date 5/31/2022/. Petitioner he is Entitled To Federal Heabes Corpus Relief Under Federal Rule 60. Has Petitioner will Identify Extraordinary Circunstances Warrant Relief, has Alien entered to United States with Visa is Entitled for the United States Federal Court To appointed Attorney alien in civil criminal matter, but my motion for to Appoint me an A Attorney in Criminal Matter was denied by Magistrate Judge in Federal Court, This Court Should Review Petitioner s Legal Suffiency Factured Evdence, Petitioner s Weight of The Evidence Claim Are Cognizable on Heabeas Corpus Review, Petitioner Claim Against his Arresting Officers SEE Sankara V. O Hara, 15 CV 7761.
For This Court Order May 31, 2022, Background Due to This Court Hon Judge Allegation that, Petitioner Ahmadou Sankara Was Arrested in New York on March 6, 2015, For Procecessing For Three Forged Bank Cards, in convicted of three counts of second degree, The State District Attorney Misledy This Federal Couert, For Petitioner Arrest, See Sankara V O Hara, 15 CV 7761, For Petitioner False Arrest, due to U.S. Fourth Amendment For Petitioner Arrest Unconstitution. And without any element of crime was precented for my conviction in state court, I am requesting this court to change the venue in get me back to U.S.A. In for this court look over full case under memorandum of law, lam innocent and I was shoot in New York there are still two bollet inside my stoniack im in stomack pain due to those two bollet, This Court Should Reconsidere And Grant Petitioner Heabes Corpus Motion Due to This Court Order May 31,2022, Under Rule 60, For The Second Circuit Court Order Jan 27,2022, Under Docket, 20-3991, SEE:Arizona v. California, 460 U.S, 805, 619 (1983); We review de novo the application of res judicata principles. TechnoMarine SA v. Giftports, Inc., 758 F,3d 493, 498 (2d Cir. 2014). "Under the doctrine of res judicata, or claim preclusion, a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action," Id. at 499 (internal quotation marks omitted). The doctrine does not apply, however, "if a party moves the rendering court in the same proceeding to correct or modify its judgment." Arizona v. California, 460 U.S, 605, 619 (1983); see also Rezzonico v. H&R Block, Inc., 182 F.3d 144, 148 (2d Cir. 1999) ("Res judicata does not speak to direct attacks in the same case, but rather has application in subsequent actions.")
My prior criminal Conviction was '45 Days time serve without any crime comitted Unconstitutional, Im Eligible for re entered in USA. And my two childs Born in USA.
SEE my medical record Gun Shot Won Exhibes Submitted to the Court Im Victime of Crime; SEE U.S. Attorney Submitted to the Court as Exhibes;
CC: James F. Gibbons Office
Assistant Attorney General
New York. NY 10005
CC; To Second Circuit Court Of Appeals
40 Foley Square New York . N Y 10007
Sankara Ahmadou
BP 133 Anyama ivory Coast
JULY 4. 2022
MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ATTORNEY UNDER 28 U S C 3006A
Hon. ALISON J NATHAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.
Petitioner Ahmadou Sankara Respectfully Submitted a MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF ATTORNEY UNDER 28 U S C 3006A Motion To The Court For Federal Civil Procedure Rules 60 (b)(4)-(6), By Replly This Court Order Date 5/31/2022/. Petitioner he is Entitled To Federal Heabes Corpus Relief Under Federal Rule 60. Has Petitioner will Identify Extraordinary Circunstances Warrant Relief, has Alien entered to United States with Visa is Entitled for the United States Federal Court To appointed Attorney alien in civil criminal matter, but my motion for to Appoint me an A Attorney in Criminal Matter was denied by Magistrate Judge in Federal Court, This Court Should Review Petitioner s Legal Suffiency Factured Evdence, Petitioner s Weight of The Evidence Claim Are Cognizable on Heabeas Corpus Review, Petitioner Claim Against his Arresting Officers
SEE Sankara V. O Hara, 15 CV 7761.
For This Court Order May 31, 2022, Background Due to This Court Hon Judge Allegation that, Petitioner Ahmadou Sankara Was Arrested in New York on March 6, 2015, For Procecessing For Three Forged Bank Cards, in convicted of three counts of second degree, The State District Attorney Misledy This Federal Couert, For Petitioner Arrest, See Sankara V O Hara, 15 CV 7761, For Petitioner False Arrest, due to U.S. Fourth Amendment For Petitioner Arrest Unconstitution. And without any element of crime was precented for my conviction in state court, I am requesting this court to change the venue in get me back to U.S.A. In for this court look over full case under memorandum of law, lam innocent and I was shoot in New York there are still two bollet inside my stomack im in stomack pain due to those two bollet, This Court Should Reconsidere And Grant Petitioner Heabes Corpus Motion Due to This Court Order May 31, 2022, Under Rule 60, For The Second Circuit Court Order Jan 27, 2022, Under Docket, 20-3991, SEE:." Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 619 (1983); We review de novo the application of res judicata principles. TechnoMarine SA v. Giftports, Inc., 758 F.3d 493, 498 (2d Cir. 2014). "Under the doctrine of res judicata, or claim preclusion, a final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action." Id. at 499 (internal quotation marks omitted). The doctrine does not apply, however, "if a party moves the rendering court in the same proceeding to correct or modify its judgment." Arizona v. California, 460 U.S. 605, 619 (1983); see also Rezzonico v. H&R Block, Inc., 182 F.3d 144, 148 (2d Cir. 1999) ("Res judicata does not speak to direct attacks in the same case, but rather has application in subsequent actions.”)
My prior criminal Conviction was '45 Days time serve without any crime comitted Unconstitutional, Im Eligible for re entered in USA. And my two childs Born in USA.
SEE my medical record Gun Shot Won Exhibes Submitted to the Court Im Victime of Crime; SEE U.S. Attorney Submitted to the Court as Exhibes;
CC: James F. Gibbons Office
Assistant Attorney General
New York. NY 10005
CC; To Second Circuit Court Of Appeals
40 Foley Square New York . N Y10007
JULY 4. 2022