Stegemann v. USA

Stegemann v. USA

Petitioner:	Joshua G. Stegemann
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	1:2022cv01275
Filed:	November 30, 2022
Court:	US District Court for the Northern District of New York
Presiding Judge:	Gary L Sharpe
Nature of Suit:	Prisoner: Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action:	28 U.S.C. § 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc
Jury Demanded By:	None

RSS Track this Docket

Docket Report

This docket was last retrieved on December 6, 2022. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.

Date Filed	Document Text
December 6, 2022	Filing 1 TEXT ONLY ORDER---Defendant Joshua G. Stegemann has moved for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 for a second time in this case. (Dkt. No. 322.) Stegemann's first motion for habeas relief was adjudicated on the merits. (Dkt. No. 285.) The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) permits one motion pursuant to 2255 unless strict ""gate-keeping" standards are met. Jiminian v. Nash, 245 F.3d 144, 146 (2d Cir. 2001). "[A] 2255 petition will... be considered second or successive [when] a prior 2255 petition was adjudicated on the merits." Villanueva v. United States, 346 F.3d 55, 60 (2d Cir. 2003). In that case, any such second or successive section 2255 motion must be certified by a panel of the appropriate court of appeals as provided by in 18 U.S.C. 2244. See 28 U.S.C. 2255(h). Stegemann does not assert, nor does it appear to the Court, that he could satisfy the "gate-keeping" requirements for certification of a successive 2255 motion. There has been no presentation of newly discovered evidence or a new rule of constitutional law as outlined by the statute. See id. Accordingly, the motion is transferred to the Second Circuit for a determination whether Stegemann should be authorized to file a second or successive motion. It is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk transfer this motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1631 & 2255(h), for a determination under 28 U.S.C. 2244(b) as to whether petitioner should be authorized to file a second or successive habeas petition in the district court. IT IS SO ORDERED. Issed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 12/6/2022. (Copy served via regular mail)(jel, )

Date Filed

Document Text

December 6, 2022

Filing 1 TEXT ONLY ORDER---Defendant Joshua G. Stegemann has moved for habeas relief pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2255 for a second time in this case. (Dkt. No. 322.) Stegemann's first motion for habeas relief was adjudicated on the merits. (Dkt. No. 285.) The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) permits one motion pursuant to 2255 unless strict ""gate-keeping" standards are met. Jiminian v. Nash, 245 F.3d 144, 146 (2d Cir. 2001). "[A] 2255 petition will... be considered second or successive [when] a prior 2255 petition was adjudicated on the merits." Villanueva v. United States, 346 F.3d 55, 60 (2d Cir. 2003). In that case, any such second or successive section 2255 motion must be certified by a panel of the appropriate court of appeals as provided by in 18 U.S.C. 2244. See 28 U.S.C. 2255(h). Stegemann does not assert, nor does it appear to the Court, that he could satisfy the "gate-keeping" requirements for certification of a successive 2255 motion. There has been no presentation of newly discovered evidence or a new rule of constitutional law as outlined by the statute. See id. Accordingly, the motion is transferred to the Second Circuit for a determination whether Stegemann should be authorized to file a second or successive motion. It is hereby ORDERED that the Clerk transfer this motion to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1631 & 2255(h), for a determination under 28 U.S.C. 2244(b) as to whether petitioner should be authorized to file a second or successive habeas petition in the district court. IT IS SO ORDERED. Issed by Senior Judge Gary L. Sharpe on 12/6/2022. (Copy served via regular mail)(jel, )

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

Search for this case: Stegemann v. USA
Search News	[ Google News \| Marketwatch \| Wall Street Journal \| Financial Times \| New York Times ]
Search Web	[ Unicourt \| Legal Web \| Google \| Bing \| Yahoo \| Ask ]
Petitioner: Joshua G. Stegemann
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 ]
Respondent: USA
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?