Rodriguez v. USA
| Jaime Rodriguez |
| USA |
| 1:2014cv04628 |
| June 9, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| New York |
| Charles S. Haight |
| Motions to Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
44
SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The United States Attorney's Office for this District is equally esteemed for its service to the cause of justice. A priority must be given to these Petitioners' present assertions, given the totality of the circumstances. The Court's ORDER is that the Government must file responsive papers as promptly as possible, and in any event not later than twenty-one (21) calendar days after the date of service upon the United States Attorney of Petiti oners' intended motion and brief. As noted supra, the Federal Defender should file and serve Petitioners' papers as promptly as reasonably possible, and in any event not later than January 31, 2020. Petitioners may reply to the Government 's responsive papers within ten (10) calendar days of the service of those responsive papers. The case will then be regarded as fully submitted. If the Court desires oral argument, counsel will be advised by Chambers. (And as further set forth herein.) It is SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight on 1/9/2020) (jca) Modified on 1/9/2020 (jca).
|
|
Filing
39
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Under these circumstances, the Court makes the following Orders: (1) the Clerk of the Court is directed to file the joint application of Rodriguez and Camacho, dated October 29, 2019, as a motion under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the consolidated habeas case of Rodriguez v. United States, No. 1:14-CV-04628 (CSH), and Camacho v. United States, No. 1:14 Civ. 4846 (CSH); (2) because all matters with respect to the present motion may be properly resolved in the consolidated habeas case under Rule 60(b), Fed. R. Civ. P., the Court hereby VACATES its prior "Memorandum and Order" (filed November 12, 2019) and directs the Clerk of the Court to administratively close the newly-opened civil actions with case numbers 1:19-CV-10407, 1:19-CV-10410, 1:19-CV-10511, and 1:19-CV-10512; (3) the Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this Order to pro se movants Jaime Rodriguez and Steven Camacho and to notify the Federal Defenders of New York and the Respondent of this Order; (4) within fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, the Federal Defenders shall notify the Court whether they intend to represent Rodriguez and/or Camacho in this matter; and if so, they shall propose a briefing schedule; (5) once the Court has received a response from the Federal Defenders, or the time to respond has expired, the Court will issue an order directing Respondent to file a response to the application; and (6) all further filings in this matter shall be made in the consolidated habeas case (Nos. 1:14-CV-4628 (CSH) and 1:14-CV-4846 (CSH)). (Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight on 11/18/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-cv-04628-CSH, 1:14-cv-04846-CSH(mro) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
|
|
Filing
38
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: Jaime Rodriguez and Steven Camacho, appearing pro se, have filed a "Joint Motion to Reopen Proceedings and Vacate Conviction and Sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255" This filing is dated October 29, 201 9. It bears Docket Numbers 14-cv-4628 and 14-cv-4846; as further set forth herein. Given the exigencies of the case, the Government is directed to file and serve its responsive brief on or before December 3, 2019. Petitioners, if so adv ised, may file and serve a reply brief on or before December 20, 2019. The Clerk is directed to give these petitions new case numbers. (Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight on 11/12/2019) Filed In Associated Cases: 1:14-cv-04628-CSH, 1:14-cv-04846-CSH(mro) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing. Transmission to Office of the Clerk of Court for processing.
|
|
Filing
24
MEMORANDUM AND OPINION ON PETITIONS FOR HABEAS CORPUS. For the reasons stated in this Ruling, I conclude that neither Camacho nor Rodriguez has demonstrated an entitlement to habeas corpus relief. Their petitions will accordingly be DENIED. It i s likely that Camacho and Rodriguez will not agree with the Court's reasoning, or approve of the principles of law by which this trial court is bound. Camacho and Rodriguez, convicted by a jury and their appeals rejected, are serving long sen tences. The Constitution promised these two young men the effective assistance of counsel. It is likely they hoped, perhaps even believed, that the rendition by counsel of effective assistance would result in acquittals, so that the convictions re veal the ineffectiveness of the assistance. In human terms, one can sympathize with such a reaction; but the rule of law is harder, more demanding. A Supreme Court decision like Strickland and its progeny lay down strict boundaries which must be cr ossed before a court may vacate a criminal conviction on a writ of habeas corpus. There are public, social and legal reasons for those restrictive boundaries. Camacho and Rodriguez may be forgiven if they reject those reasons utterly. This Court is bound by them. I have considered all of Petitioners' contentions, whether or not they are discussed at length in this Ruling. Upon full consideration, I am unable to discern in this case any ground upon which either Camacho or Rodriguez are entitled to habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, and for the foregoing reasons: The Petition of Jaime Rodriguez for a writ of Habeas Corpus, No. 14 Civ. 4628, is DENIED and the Petition is DISMISSED. The Petition of Steven Camacho for a writ of habeas corpus, No. 14 Civ. 4846, is DENIED and the Petition is DISMISSED. It is SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Charles S. Haight on 12/13/2017) (anc)
|
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 Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Rodriguez v. USA | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: USA | |
| Represented By: | Katherine Cannella Reilly |
| 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 ] |
| Petitioner: Jaime Rodriguez | |
| 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.
