Sealed Defendant 1 v. USA

Sealed Defendant 1 v. USA

Petitioner:	Julio Cesar Lopez Pena
Respondent:	USA
Case Number:	1:2010cv07381
Filed:	September 27, 2010
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	New York
Presiding Judge:	Robert W. Sweet
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 2, 2011	Filing 11 MEMORANDUM DECISION: Defendant Julio Cesar Lopez-Pena moves pro se pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. Lopez-Pena challenges his conviction on two grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, arguing that trial and appellate counsel failed to provide effective assistance of counsel, in violation of the Sixth Amendment... For the reasons set forth above, Lopez-Pena has failed to demonstrate any basis for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. That motion is therefore denied. Lopez-Penals motions for discovery and an evidentiary hearing are denied as well, as he has not established "a plausible claim of ineffective assistance of counsel." Because Lopez-Pena has not made a substantial showin g of the denial of a constitutional right, I decline to issue a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1996) (as amended by the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act). I certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (3) that any appeal taken from this decision and order would not be taken in good faith. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 5/2/2011) (dnd)

Date Filed

Document Text

May 2, 2011

Filing 11 MEMORANDUM DECISION: Defendant Julio Cesar Lopez-Pena moves pro se pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. Lopez-Pena challenges his conviction on two grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, arguing that trial and appellate counsel failed to provide effective assistance of counsel, in violation of the Sixth Amendment... For the reasons set forth above, Lopez-Pena has failed to demonstrate any basis for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. That motion is therefore denied. Lopez-Penals motions for discovery and an evidentiary hearing are denied as well, as he has not established "a plausible claim of ineffective assistance of counsel." Because Lopez-Pena has not made a substantial showin g of the denial of a constitutional right, I decline to issue a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1996) (as amended by the Anti-terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act). I certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (3) that any appeal taken from this decision and order would not be taken in good faith. The Clerk of the Court shall close this case. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 5/2/2011) (dnd)

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

Search for this case: Sealed Defendant 1 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
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: Julio Cesar Lopez Pena
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?