Pritchard v. State of Connecticut
| Andrew Hamilton Pritchard |
| Gary White, Bruce Hudock, Maria Gonzalez, Kenneth Provodator, Kevin Randolph, John F. Blawie, Kevin Hernandez, Peter McShane, Scott M. Jones and Mary Elizabeth Reid |
| 3:2024cv01103 |
| June 25, 2024 |
| U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut |
| Sarala V Nagala |
| Robert A Richardson |
| Habeas Corpus (General) |
| 28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State) |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on August 16, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 17 NOTICE-The Fourth Writ of Capias, by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 16 MOTION for Writ of Mandamus, by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Mendez, D) |
Filing 15
ORDER. In ECF No. 11, this Court denied Petitioner's request for the issuance of a writ of capias #9 . Petitioner brings a second #13 and third #13 request for the same writ. This Court reiterates the reasoning from its prior order and notes that Petitioner neither advances the legal grounds upon which a federal court could issue such a writ, nor, in any event, explained the factual basis for such a writ to issue. The Court again emphasizes the August 30, 2024 deadline for filing an amended petition. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 8/15/2024. (Lum, A)
|
| Filing 14 NOTICE-The Third Writ of Capias for United States District of Connecticut Judge Sarala V. Nagala and the First for Clerk, by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 13 NOTICE-The Second Writ Of Capias for United States District of Connecticut Judge Sarala V. Nagala and the First for Clerk, by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Mendez, D) |
|
Filing 12
ORDER denying #10 Motion for Default Judgment. The Court has reviewed Petitioner's motion and finds it inapplicable to this stage of the proceedings. The Court has issued an order dismissing the petition, ECF No. #7 , and reiterates that August 30, 2024, is the deadline for filing an amended petition. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 08/08/2024. (Lum, A)
|
|
Filing 11
ORDER. In the filing at ECF No. #9 , Petitioner has sought issuance of a writ of capias and issuance of an arrest warrant against the undersigned. The Court finds that Petitioner has neither advanced the legal grounds upon which a federal court could issue such a writ, nor, in any event, explained the factual basis for such a writ to issue. The Court construes ECF No. #9 as a motion for reconsideration of its order dismissing the petition, ECF No. 7. "The standard for granting reconsideration is strict, and reconsideration will generally be denied unless the moving party can point to controlling decisions or data that the court overlooked-- matters, in other words, that might reasonably be expected to alter the conclusion reached by the court." Van Buskirk v. United Grp. of Cos., Inc., 935 F.3d 49, 54 (2d Cir. 2019); see also D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 7(c)1; Cho v. Blackberry Ltd., 991 F.3d 155, 170 (2d Cir. 2021) (cleaned up) (reconsideration warranted "only when the party identifies an intervening change of controlling law, the availability of new evidence, or the need to correct a clear error or prevent manifest injustice"). A motion for reconsideration is "not a vehicle for relitigating old issues, presenting the case under new theories, securing a rehearing on the merits, or otherwise taking a second bite at the apple." Analytical Surveys, Inc. v. Tonga Partners, L.P., 684 F.3d 36, 52 (2d Cir. 2012) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)). Petitioner's motion fails because his citations to caselaw and various statutory and constitutional provisions do not present any intervening change of controlling law that the Court has not considered. Additionally, Petitioner fails to identify a clear error of the Court that ought to be corrected. For these reasons, the Court denies Petitioner's motion for reconsideration. The Court reiterates the August 30, 2024, deadline for filing an amended petition. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 08/08/2024. (Lum, A)
|
| Filing 10 MOTION for Default Judgment, by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 9 NOTICE, Writ of Capias for United States District of Connecticut Judge Sarala V. Nagala with Affidavit, by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Attachments: #1 Exhibits) (Mendez, D) |
| Set Deadlines: Amended Pleadings due by 8/30/2024; Dismissal due by 8/31/2024. (Bergeson, Samantha) |
|
Filing 7
ORDER DISMISSING PETITION. For the reasons described in the attached ruling, the original and amended petitions for writ of habeas corpus are dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. To the extent Pritchard believes he can adequately serve as Magliari's "next friend" under the legal standard set forth in the ruling, he may file a second amended petition by August 30, 2024. Alternatively, to the extent Magliari believes he is entitled to habeas relief, Magliari may file a petition on his own behalf in a new action. If no amended petition is filed by August 30, 2024, the Court will close this case. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 07/31/2024.(Lum, A)
|
| Filing 8 AFFIDAVIT: Statement of Truth and Default; Default Judgment by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Shafer, J.) |
| Filing 6 Addendum to Writ of June 25, 2024 Habeas Corpus, by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Mendez, D) |
| Filing 5 AMENDED PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus to correct party names, filed by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard.(Pesta, J.) |
| Filing 4 Notice of Option to Consent to Magistrate Judge Jurisdiction. (Mendez, D) |
|
Filing 3
ELECTRONIC FILING ORDER FOR COUNSEL - PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH COURTESY COPY REQUIREMENTS IN THIS ORDER. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 6/25/2024. (Mendez, D)
|
|
Filing 2
Standing Protective Order. Signed by Judge Sarala V. Nagala on 6/25/2024. (Mendez, D)
|
| Filing 1 PETITION for Writ of Habeas Corpus, filed by Andrew Hamilton Pritchard. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit, #2 Exhibit 2)(Fanelle, N.) |
| Filing fee received from Andrew Hamilton Pritchard: $5.00, receipt number BPT-374052. (Fanelle, N.) |
| Judge Sarala V. Nagala and Judge Robert A. Richardson added. (Reis, J) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Connecticut 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
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.
