King v. United States of America

King v. United States of America

Plaintiff:	David Louis King
Defendant:	United States of America
Case Number:	1:2016cv00501
Filed:	May 26, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the District of New Mexico
Office:	Albuquerque Office
County:	-OUT OF STATE-
Presiding Judge:	Kirtan Khalsa
Presiding Judge:	Martha Vazquez
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
March 31, 2017	Filing 18 ORDER ADOPTING 12 and 15 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by District Judge Martha Vazquez; OVERRULING 13 Objections filed by United States of America, OVERRULING 14 OBJECTIONS re 13 Objections Supplement, and OVERRULING 17 Memorandum in Opposition filed by United States of America; and GRANTING 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255 under Johnson v. USA) filed by David Louis King. See Order for Specifics. (gr)
February 17, 2017	Filing 15 MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S SUPPLEMENTAL PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION by Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa regarding Defendant/Movant's Emergency Motion to Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Objections to Supplemental Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition due by 3/3/2017. Add 3 days to the deadline if service is by mailing it to the person's last known address (or means described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(D) and (F)); if service is by electronic means, no additional days are added. (Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d); Fed. R. Crim. P. 45(c).) (kmt)

Date Filed

Document Text

March 31, 2017

Filing 18 ORDER ADOPTING 12 and 15 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS by District Judge Martha Vazquez; OVERRULING 13 Objections filed by United States of America, OVERRULING 14 OBJECTIONS re 13 Objections Supplement, and OVERRULING 17 Memorandum in Opposition filed by United States of America; and GRANTING 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255 under Johnson v. USA) filed by David Louis King. See Order for Specifics. (gr)

February 17, 2017

Filing 15 MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S SUPPLEMENTAL PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION by Magistrate Judge Kirtan Khalsa regarding Defendant/Movant's Emergency Motion to Correct Sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Objections to Supplemental Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition due by 3/3/2017. Add 3 days to the deadline if service is by mailing it to the person's last known address (or means described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(b)(2)(D) and (F)); if service is by electronic means, no additional days are added. (Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(d); Fed. R. Crim. P. 45(c).) (kmt)

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 New Mexico District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: King 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 ]
Plaintiff: David Louis King
Represented By:	Kenneth Gleria
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 ]
Defendant: United States of America
Represented By:	George C Kraehe
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?