Fuentes v. United States of America et al
| Sonny Fuentes |
| United States of America, Alan C. Kay, David Duncan and Harley G. Lappin |
| 1:2008cv00095 |
| February 27, 2008 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| Prisoner: Vacate Sentence Office |
| Honolulu |
| KEVIN S.C. CHANG |
| ALAN C KAY |
| None |
| U.S. Government Defendant |
| 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentence |
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
12
ORDER DISMISSING PETITIONER'S MOTION TO AMEND PETITIONER'S PETITION AND DENYING PETITIONER'S RULE 60(b) MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT re 10 by Sonny Fuentes. Signed by JUDGE ALAN C KAY. (eps ) - CR 95-00534 ACK; CV 99-172 ACK, CV 08-95 ACK-KSC Based on the foregoing, it is hereby ORDERED that Petitioner's Motion to Amend Petitioner's Petition be DISMISSED and Petitioner's Motion for Relief from Judgment be DENIED. Petitioner must obtain auth orization from the Ninth Circuit to file any successive § 2255 petition, or any pleading that is construed as a § 2255 petition, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3)(A). The Court finds that both the Motion to Amend Petitioner's Pet ition and the ineffective counsel argument of the 60(b) Motion require such authorization. Further, Petitioner's fraud argument within his 60(b) Motion for Relief from Judgment, though not a successive § 2255 petition, is denied because it is not timely.
|
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 Hawaii 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.
