Vazquez v. Richmond County Supreme Court

Justia Dockets & Filings Second Circuit New York Eastern District Vazquez v. Richmond County Supreme Court

Vazquez v. Richmond County Supreme Court

Petitioner:	Jose Vazquez
Respondent:	Richmond County Supreme Court
Case Number:	1:2016cv02499
Filed:	May 20, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Eastern District of New York
Office:	Brooklyn Office
Presiding Judge:	Carol Bagley Amon
Nature of Suit:	Habeas Corpus (General)
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2254 Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus (State)
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
January 24, 2018	Filing 12 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The Court dismisses as time-barred the § 2254 petition. Because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of constitutional right, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C . § 2253. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court certifies that petitioner would not take any appeal in good faith and that this Court therefore denies in forma pauperis for the purpose of any appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Court respectfully directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly and to close the case. Ordered by Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 1/24/2018. (fwd for judgment) (Fernandez, Erica)
December 30, 2016	Filing 8 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The Court directs petitioner to show cause by written affirmation, within 60 days from entry of this Memorandum and Order, why the petition should not be dismissed as time-barred by the AEDPA's one-year statute of limitati ons. See Day, 547 U.S. at 209 ("[W]e hold that district courts are permitted, but not obliged, to consider, sua sponte, the timeliness of a state prisoner's habeas petition."); Acosta, 221 F.3d at 124 (holding that "a district cou rt has the authority to raise the AEDPA statute of limitation on its own motion"). Petitioner may include any facts to support equitable tolling of the limitations period. Petitioner's application for counsel is denied without prejudice. No response or answer shall be required at this time from respondent and all further proceedings shall be stayed for 60 days or until petitioner has complied with this Order. If petitioner fails to comply with this Order within the time allowed, the instant petition shall be dismissed as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Ordered by Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 12/29/2016. (Fernandez, Erica)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 24, 2018

Filing 12 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The Court dismisses as time-barred the § 2254 petition. Because petitioner has not made a substantial showing of the denial of constitutional right, the Court declines to issue a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C . § 2253. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a), the Court certifies that petitioner would not take any appeal in good faith and that this Court therefore denies in forma pauperis for the purpose of any appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). The Court respectfully directs the Clerk of Court to enter judgment accordingly and to close the case. Ordered by Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 1/24/2018. (fwd for judgment) (Fernandez, Erica)

December 30, 2016

Filing 8 MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: The Court directs petitioner to show cause by written affirmation, within 60 days from entry of this Memorandum and Order, why the petition should not be dismissed as time-barred by the AEDPA's one-year statute of limitati ons. See Day, 547 U.S. at 209 ("[W]e hold that district courts are permitted, but not obliged, to consider, sua sponte, the timeliness of a state prisoner's habeas petition."); Acosta, 221 F.3d at 124 (holding that "a district cou rt has the authority to raise the AEDPA statute of limitation on its own motion"). Petitioner may include any facts to support equitable tolling of the limitations period. Petitioner's application for counsel is denied without prejudice. No response or answer shall be required at this time from respondent and all further proceedings shall be stayed for 60 days or until petitioner has complied with this Order. If petitioner fails to comply with this Order within the time allowed, the instant petition shall be dismissed as time-barred under 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d). Ordered by Judge Carol Bagley Amon on 12/29/2016. (Fernandez, Erica)

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 York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System

Search for this case: Vazquez v. Richmond County Supreme Court
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Respondent: Richmond County Supreme Court
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: Jose Vazquez
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?