United States of America v. Jesus Lopez

United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
Submitted April 1, 2026
Decided April 6, 2026
Before
MICHAEL B. BRENNAN, Chief Judge
FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge
DAVID F. HAMILTON, Circuit Judge
No. 25-2586
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
JESUS LOPEZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Indiana,
Hammond Division.
No. 2:16-cr-00177-JTM-APR-2
James T. Moody,
Judge.
O R D E R
In 2018, defendant-appellant Jesus Lopez pled guilty to possessing methamphet-
amine with intent to distribute, waived his right to appeal, and was sentenced to the
statutory maximum of twenty years in prison. Despite his appeal waiver, Lopez ap-
pealed that judgment. We affirmed in No. 20-2557, decided November 23, 2022. Lopez
then sought relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The
district court denied that motion and denied a certificate of appealability in November
2024. Lopez has appealed those denials, and his motion for a certificate of appealability
is pending in this court in No. 24-3139.
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION
To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 25-2586 Page 2
Then, after his § 2255 motion was denied, Lopez asked the district court to sub-
mit to this court transcripts of his change of plea and his sentencing, as well as grand
jury transcripts. The district court denied those requests. In this appeal, Lopez appeals
from the district court’s order denying those requests. The government has moved to
dismiss the appeal, and Lopez has responded.
First, we must dismiss the portion of this appeal regarding the transcripts of the
change of plea and sentencing. Those transcripts were prepared and docketed, and this
court has access to them in the ordinary course of our business. This portion of the ap-
peal is effectively moot and must be dismissed.
Second, the portion of the appeal addressing the request for grand jury tran-
scripts presents a different problem. Lopez’s response to the government’s motion to
dismiss said that he needs the grand jury transcripts to prove that prosecutors allegedly
engaged in misconduct by misrepresenting facts and charging him under the wrong
statute. This response thus made clear that Lopez’s request for grand jury transcripts
seeks to challenge his conviction, so it is in substance a successive motion for relief un-
der § 2255. See United States v. Scott, 414 F.3d 815 (7th Cir. 2005) (request for grand jury
transcripts for purpose of challenging conviction deemed was in substance a motion un-
der § 2254). Lopez has not offered any basis for avoiding the statutory restrictions on
successive motions. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h). Under Scott, the district court therefore did
not have jurisdiction to entertain Lopez’s request for grand jury transcripts for that pur-
pose. Following the approach we took in Scott, we therefore vacate the portion of the
district court order denying the request for grand jury transcripts and remand the mat-
ter to the district court with instructions to dismiss that portion of Lopez’s request for
lack of jurisdiction. See Scott, 414 F.3d at 817.
DISMISSED IN PART AND VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART.

-- 2 of 2 --