Acosta v. USA

Acosta v. USA

Petitioner:	Andrew Acosta
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	2:2016cv04587
Filed:	August 16, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office:	Phoenix Division Office
County:	Maricopa
Presiding Judge:	G Murray Snow
Nature of Suit:	Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2255
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 2, 2018	Filing 25 ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 18 - Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED. The Clerk of Court shall TERMINATE this action, including the pending Motion to Amend (Doc. [1 9]), Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 21 ), Motion for Continuance (Doc. 22 ), and Motion for Status (Doc. 23 ), as being moot. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases, in the event Movant files an appeal, the Cour t declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). (See document for further details). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 4/2/18. (LAD)
March 12, 2018	Filing 18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending 6 Motion to Vacate, Set Aside orCorrect Sentence Case Transferred In be denied and that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be denied because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 3/12/18. (DXD) Modified text on 3/12/2018 (DXD).

Date Filed

Document Text

April 2, 2018

Filing 25 ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 18 - Petitioner's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 is DENIED. The Clerk of Court shall TERMINATE this action, including the pending Motion to Amend (Doc. [1 9]), Motion for Appointment of Counsel (Doc. 21 ), Motion for Continuance (Doc. 22 ), and Motion for Status (Doc. 23 ), as being moot. Pursuant to Rule 11(a) of the Rules Governing Section 2255 Cases, in the event Movant files an appeal, the Cour t declines to issue a certificate of appealability because reasonable jurists would not find the Court's procedural ruling debatable. See Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). (See document for further details). Signed by Judge G Murray Snow on 4/2/18. (LAD)

March 12, 2018

Filing 18 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION recommending 6 Motion to Vacate, Set Aside orCorrect Sentence Case Transferred In be denied and that a Certificate of Appealability and leave to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal be denied because Petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right. Signed by Magistrate Judge David K Duncan on 3/12/18. (DXD) Modified text on 3/12/2018 (DXD).

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

Search for this case: Acosta 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:	Charles Fred Hyder(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
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: Andrew Acosta
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?