Antonio v. USA

Antonio v. USA

Petitioner:	James Paul Antonio
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	4:2016cv00341
Filed:	June 10, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the District of Arizona
Office:	Tucson Division Office
County:	Pima
Presiding Judge:	Cindy K Jorgenson
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
September 16, 2022	Filing 42 ORDER that the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 1 ) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability shall issue because of the shifting legal landscape involving crimes of vi olence pursuant to § 924(c) and because the Court's assessment of the constitutional claim resulted in a finding that Antonio could not show prejudice from the alleged constitutional error and the claim is procedurally barred. The Court finds reasonable jurists could debate whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Senior Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 9/16/22. (JAM)

Date Filed

Document Text

September 16, 2022

Filing 42 ORDER that the Motion to Vacate, Set Aside, or Correct Sentence Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Doc. 1 ) is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a certificate of appealability shall issue because of the shifting legal landscape involving crimes of vi olence pursuant to § 924(c) and because the Court's assessment of the constitutional claim resulted in a finding that Antonio could not show prejudice from the alleged constitutional error and the claim is procedurally barred. The Court finds reasonable jurists could debate whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right and whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000). IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall enter judgment accordingly and close this case. Signed by Senior Judge Cindy K Jorgenson on 9/16/22. (JAM)

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: Antonio 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:	David Paul Flannigan(Designation Assistant US Attorney)
Represented By:	Micah Schmit(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: James Paul Antonio
Represented By:	Ryan Moore
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?