Shue v. United States of America

Shue v. United States of America

Petitioner:	Peter Shue
Respondent:	United States of America
Case Number:	2:2014cv02010
Filed:	March 24, 2014
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Central Islip Office
Presiding Judge:	Joanna Seybert
Presiding Judge:	William D. Wall
Nature of Suit:	Mandamus & Other
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 1651 Petition for Writ of Coram Nobis
Jury Demanded By:	None

Follow case documents by RSS

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed	Document Text
February 24, 2015	Filing 26 MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying 14 Motion for Leave to File; denying as moot 14 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying as moot 17 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying as moot 22 Motion for Summary Judgment. For the foregoing reasons, Shue's Petition for a writ of audita querela (Docket Entry 1) and his motion to reduce his sentence (Docket Entry 14) are DENIED. Shue's motions for the appointment of a public defender (Docket Entry 14) and for this Court to render a decision on his Petition (Docket Entries 17, 22) are consequently DENIED AS MOOT. The Court certifies that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for t he purpose of any appeal. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order to pro se Petitioner and mark this case CLOSED. The Clerk of the Court is also directed to docket a copy of this Memorandum and Order in Shue's criminal case, United States v. Shue, No. 95-CR-0301 (E.D.N.Y.). So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 2/24/2015. C/M; C/ECF (Valle, Christine)

Date Filed

Document Text

February 24, 2015

Filing 26 MEMORANDUM & ORDER denying 14 Motion for Leave to File; denying as moot 14 Motion to Appoint Counsel; denying as moot 17 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying as moot 22 Motion for Summary Judgment. For the foregoing reasons, Shue's Petition for a writ of audita querela (Docket Entry 1) and his motion to reduce his sentence (Docket Entry 14) are DENIED. Shue's motions for the appointment of a public defender (Docket Entry 14) and for this Court to render a decision on his Petition (Docket Entries 17, 22) are consequently DENIED AS MOOT. The Court certifies that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for t he purpose of any appeal. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order to pro se Petitioner and mark this case CLOSED. The Clerk of the Court is also directed to docket a copy of this Memorandum and Order in Shue's criminal case, United States v. Shue, No. 95-CR-0301 (E.D.N.Y.). So Ordered by Judge Joanna Seybert on 2/24/2015. C/M; C/ECF (Valle, Christine)

Access additional case information on PACER

Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.

Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Shue v. United States of America
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Peter Shue
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: United States of America
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Finance	[ Google Finance \| Yahoo Finance \| Hoovers \| SEC Edgar Filings ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Justia Dockets \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?