Jackson v. United States of America

Jackson v. United States of America

Plaintiff:	Gary Jackson
Defendant:	United States Of America
Case Number:	1:2016cv04510
Filed:	June 14, 2016
Court:	US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office:	Foley Square Office
County:	New York
Presiding Judge:	Naomi Reice Buchwald
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
January 13, 2020	Filing 8 ORDER on Motion to Vacate Sentence (28 U.S.C. 2255): On June 14, 2016, Gary Jackson filed a "placeholder" petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) in light of the Supreme Court 's decision in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). Resolution of Jackson's petition was stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Davis, 134 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). Consistent with Davis, this Court held a hearing on January 9, 2020 at which: (1) the government consented to a vacatur of Jackson's conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c); and (2) Jackson was resentenced on his remaining counts of conviction. The January 9, 2020 hearin g having granted the relief requested in Jackson's § 2255 motion, that motion is hereby DENIED as moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close case number 16 Civ. 4510 and to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 343 and 355 in case number 01 Cr. 450-3. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald on 1/13/2020) (js)

Date Filed

Document Text

January 13, 2020

Filing 8 ORDER on Motion to Vacate Sentence (28 U.S.C. 2255): On June 14, 2016, Gary Jackson filed a "placeholder" petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate his conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) in light of the Supreme Court 's decision in Johnson v. United States, 135 S. Ct. 2551 (2015). Resolution of Jackson's petition was stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Davis, 134 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). Consistent with Davis, this Court held a hearing on January 9, 2020 at which: (1) the government consented to a vacatur of Jackson's conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c); and (2) Jackson was resentenced on his remaining counts of conviction. The January 9, 2020 hearin g having granted the relief requested in Jackson's § 2255 motion, that motion is hereby DENIED as moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to close case number 16 Civ. 4510 and to terminate the motions pending at docket numbers 343 and 355 in case number 01 Cr. 450-3. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald on 1/13/2020) (js)

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: Jackson 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 ]
Defendant: United States Of America
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 ]
Plaintiff: Gary Jackson
Represented By:	Philip L Weinstein
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?