Nakai v. USA
| Gregory Nakai |
| USA |
| 3:2016cv08310 |
| June 13, 2016 |
| US District Court for the District of Arizona |
| Prescott Division Office |
| Navajo |
| John Z Boyle |
| David G Campbell |
| 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
53
ORDER - IT IS ORDERED: Judge Boyle's R&R (Doc. 48 ) is accepted in part and rejected in part. Nakais § 2255 motion (Doc. 3 ) is denied with respect to Counts 2 and 8 (§ 924 convictions based on first-degree murder), Count 10 ( 67; 924 conviction based on carjacking), and Count 14 (§ 924 conviction based on robbery). The motion is granted with respect to Counts 6 and 18 (§ 924 convictions based on kidnapping) and Counts 4, 12, and 16 (§ 924 convictions bas ed on felony murder). Nakai's convictions and sentences with respect to Counts 4, 6, 12, 16, and 18 are vacated. A certificate of appealability is granted. See document for complete details. Signed by Senior Judge David G Campbell on 8/11/2021. (WLP) NEF regenerated to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals only on 8/12/2021 (NKS).
|
|
Filing
48
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION that Movant's Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 3 be denied, in part, as to Counts 2, 4, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 and granted, in part, as to Counts 6 and 18. IT IS FURTHE R RECOMMENDED that the Court vacate Movant's convictions and sentences on Counts 6 and 18. IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that a Certificate of Appealability be granted because reasonable jurists could debate the conclusions of this R&R. The parties shall have 14 days from the date of service of a copy of this recommendation within which to file specific written objections with the Court. Thereafter, the parties have 14 days within which to file a response to the objections. Signed by Magistrate Judge John Z Boyle on 12/22/2020. (REK)
|
|
Filing
17
ORDER: Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle's R&R (Doc. 13 ) is accepted in part and rejected in part as explained above. The government's motion to dismiss (Doc. 6 ) is granted in part and denied in part. Ground One's claim that § 9 24(c) and (j) permit only one count per indictment is dismissed with prejudice. Ground Two is dismissed with prejudice. The motion for a stay (Doc. 9 ) is remanded for further review. Movant's request for a certificate of appealability is remanded for further review. This case is remanded to Magistrate Judge John Z. Boyle for further proceedings and a report and recommendation. Signed by Judge David G Campbell on 4/16/18. (EJA)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Nakai 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: | Vincent Quill Kirby(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: Gregory Nakai | |
| 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.
