Borcyk v. Lempke

Borcyk v. Lempke

Petitioner:	Gregory Borcyk
Respondent:	John Lempke
Case Number:	6:2010cv06137
Filed:	March 16, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Western District of New York
Office:	Rochester Office
Presiding Judge:	Marian W. Payson
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
April 13, 2012	Filing 21 DECISION AND ORDER denying petition for a writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the petition. (Clerk to close case.) Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 4/13/12. (JMC)
August 2, 2010	Filing 12 ORDER granting in part and denying in part petitioner's 5 Motion to Stay. Court denies as moot petitioner's request for a stay as to the second ineffectiveness claim, since that claim is exhausted. As to petitioner's request to stay the petition to pursue further state court remedies on the first ineffectiveness claim, petitioner is directed to review the foregoing Order and decide whether or not he wishes to pursue a stay with regard to that claim, in light of the possible pro cedural bar issues presented by C.P.L. § 440.10(3)(c). Petitioner must notify the Court of his intentions or seek an extension of time to do so within 30 days of the date of his receipt of this Order. Signed by Hon. David G. Larimer on 8/2/10. (EMA)

Date Filed

Document Text

April 13, 2012

Filing 21 DECISION AND ORDER denying petition for a writ of habeas corpus and dismissing the petition. (Clerk to close case.) Signed by Hon. Michael A. Telesca on 4/13/12. (JMC)

August 2, 2010

Filing 12 ORDER granting in part and denying in part petitioner's 5 Motion to Stay. Court denies as moot petitioner's request for a stay as to the second ineffectiveness claim, since that claim is exhausted. As to petitioner's request to stay the petition to pursue further state court remedies on the first ineffectiveness claim, petitioner is directed to review the foregoing Order and decide whether or not he wishes to pursue a stay with regard to that claim, in light of the possible pro cedural bar issues presented by C.P.L. § 440.10(3)(c). Petitioner must notify the Court of his intentions or seek an extension of time to do so within 30 days of the date of his receipt of this Order. Signed by Hon. David G. Larimer on 8/2/10. (EMA)

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 Western District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Borcyk v. Lempke
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: John Lempke
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: Gregory Borcyk
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?