Inoshita v. USA

Inoshita v. USA

Petitioner:	Gregg Inoshita
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	1:2016cv00032
Filed:	January 27, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the District of Hawaii
Office:	Hawaii Office
County:	Honolulu
Presiding Judge:	KEVIN S.C. CHANG
Presiding Judge:	J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT
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
May 20, 2016	Filing 3 ORDER : (1) DISMISSING DEFENDANT-PETITIONER'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT SENTENCE BY A PERSON IN A FEDERAL CUSTODY; AND (2) GRANTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY re 1 as to Gregg Inoshita - Sig ned by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 5/20/2016. "Based on the foregoing, the court finds that Inoshita waived his right to collaterally attack his sentence, and bank robbery under § 2113(a) remains a crime of viole nce. Accordingly, the court DENIES Inoshitas § 2255 Motion, but GRANTS a certificate of appealability. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Rule 11(a), Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts." (CR 15-00159 JMS; CV 16-00032 JMS-KSC) (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

Date Filed

Document Text

May 20, 2016

Filing 3 ORDER : (1) DISMISSING DEFENDANT-PETITIONER'S MOTION UNDER 28 U.S.C. § 2255TO VACATE, SET ASIDE, OR CORRECT SENTENCE BY A PERSON IN A FEDERAL CUSTODY; AND (2) GRANTING A CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY re 1 as to Gregg Inoshita - Sig ned by CHIEF JUDGE J. MICHAEL SEABRIGHT on 5/20/2016. "Based on the foregoing, the court finds that Inoshita waived his right to collaterally attack his sentence, and bank robbery under § 2113(a) remains a crime of viole nce. Accordingly, the court DENIES Inoshitas § 2255 Motion, but GRANTS a certificate of appealability. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b); Rule 11(a), Rules Governing Section 2255 Proceedings for the United States District Courts." (CR 15-00159 JMS; CV 16-00032 JMS-KSC) (emt, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

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

Search for this case: Inoshita 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:	Darren W.K. Ching(Designation Government)
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: Gregg Inoshita
Represented By:	Peter C. Wolff(Designation Public Defender or Community Defender Appointment)
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?