Turner v. United States of America
| William Clark Turner |
| United States of America |
| 1:2020cv00286 |
| June 25, 2020 |
| US District Court for the District of Hawaii |
| KENNETH J MANSFIELD |
| SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY |
| Mandamus & Other |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 1651 |
| None |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on September 21, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 9
EO: The Government's response to the coram nobis petition is due by September 23, 2020. Petitioner may file an optional reply memorandum by October 7, 2020. If, after reviewing the briefs, this court decides that a hearing would be helpful, it will inform the attorneys. Otherwise, the court will decide the matter without a hearing. Subsequent filings in this case should be made in the related criminal case, Crim. No. 16-00207. re #7 . (JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY)(cib)
|
|
Filing 8
Declaration Of David J. Cohen, Esq. re #7 MOTION Dr. Turner's Petition for Writ of error coram nobis . (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A, #2 Exhibit B , #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E, #6 Exhibit F, #7 Exhibit G, #8 Exhibit H, #9 Exhibit I)(Cohen, David) Docket Text Modified on 8/13/2020 (jo)
|
|
Filing 7
MOTION Dr. Turner's Petition for Writ of error coram nobis David J. Cohen appearing for Petitioner William Clark Turner (Attachments: #1 Declaration of Dan Lype, Esq., #2 Declaration of Dr. William C. Turner, #3 Declaration of Michael J. Pellegrini, Esq., #4 Declaration Tamara Thompson)(Cohen, David) Docket Text Modified on 8/13/2020 (jo)
|
|
Filing 6
EO: The court notes that William Harrison has entered an appearance as local counsel in Dr. Turner's criminal case, and that appearance is deemed applicable to Dr. Turner's 2255 and coram nobis actions. (JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY)(cib)
|
|
Filing 5
NOTICE by William Clark Turner of Appearnce of Local Counsel on Behalf of William Clark Turner. (Harrison, William)
|
|
Filing 4
NOTICE of Case Assignment; All documents relevant to the Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis, shall be entered in BOTH the civil and criminal case. Civil case number CV 20-00286-SOM-KJM and CR 16-00207-SOM. (cib)
|
|
Filing 3
EO: Petitioner William Clark Turner has filed a petition for a writ of coram nobis, notwithstanding the pendency of his 2255 motion. Recognizing that coram nobis relief is inconsistent with 2255 relief, Dr. Turner asks this court to stay his coram nobis request. At the same time, Dr. Turner asks for leave to file a 40-page coram nobis brief, which is 15 pages over the 25-page limit set forth in local court rules. This court denies the request for leave to file a 40-page brief on three grounds. First, the request, like the underlying coram nobis petition, is filed by an attorney who is licensed in California and who has already been told by this court that pro hac vice status is conditioned on his having local counsel. No local counsel is listed on the filings. This is the same problem this court noted with respect to pending 2255 proceedings. In the 2255 matter, Dr. Turner's counsel asked to be allowed to identify local counsel by June 29, 2020, and the court set that deadline. To date, no local counsel has been named in the 2255 proceeding. There is no reason for this court to countenance coram nobis proceedings without local counsel. Second, even putting aside the failure to identify local counsel, the court declines to allow a 40-page brief. In the 2255 proceeding, Dr. Turner asked for leave to file a 70-page brief, which this court denied. This court did allow an oversized brief not exceeding 35 pages. This court sees no reason to allow a 40-page brief in the coram nobis context, where relief is more extraordinary than in the 2255 context. The court limits Dr. Turner to the normal 25-page limit. Third, the court notes that the oversized coram nobis brief that Dr. Turner has proffered appears to be largely a retooling of his 2255 brief, without discussion of the law and standard applicable to coram nobis petitions. The court suggests that any new brief focus on the relief available in a coram nobis proceeding. For example, the conclusion of the proffered coram nobis petition asks for a new trial, without discussing how that might work in a coram nobis context. Having already completed his sentence, Dr. Turner presumably would not want to be sentenced anew if it happened that he was found guilty on a retrial. This court is familiar with coram nobis petitions that seek to avoid collateral consequences by having convictions nullified or expunged without retrial, and this court has previously noted in connection with Dr. Turner's pending 2255 proceeding that a coram nobis petition is not simply a 2255 argument with coram nobis substituted for every reference to 2255. In any event, the court denies Dr. Turner's application to file a 40-page brief and strikes any brief exceeding 25 pages. This ruling renders moot the request to stay the coram nobis petition, as there is no petition now pending. The court does not, however, close the civil case opened in connection with the coram nobis proceeding. Instead, the court will leave the case open until August 7, 2020, and will thereafter close the civil case only if Dr. Turner has failed to identify local counsel and has failed to file a new coram nobis petition by that date. Dr. Turner may, of course, expedite the coram nobis proceeding by filing his new petition ahead of that deadline, provided he names local counsel. re #1 , #2 . (JUDGE SUSAN OKI MOLLWAY)(cib, )
|
|
Filing 2
APPLICATION PURSUANT TO CRIMINAL LOCAL RULE 12.3 AND CIVIL LOCAL RULES 7.4(a) AND 99.3(a) TO FILE OVERSIZED BRIEF filed by William Clark Turner. (Attachments: #1 Declaration David Cohen, #2 proposed order)(cib)
|
|
Filing 1
PETITION for a Writ Error Coram Nobis filed by William Clark Turner.(Attachments: #1 Declaration Dan Lype, #2 Declaration Tamara Thompson, #3 Declaration Dr. William Turner, #4 Declaration Michael J. Pellegrini)Clerks Notation: This document was e-filed by David J. Cohen, Esq., counsel for (01) William Clark Turner, in criminal case, CR 16-00207 SOM-01 on June 24, 2020.(cib)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Turner v. United States of America | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Respondent: United States of America | |
| Represented By: | Margaret C. Nammar |
| 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: William Clark Turner | |
| Represented By: | David J. Cohen |
| Represented By: | William A. Harrison |
| 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.
