Baldeo v. United States of America
Plaintiff: Albert Baldeo
Defendant: United States Of America
Case Number: 1:2017cv01692
Filed: March 7, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge: Paul A. Crotty
Nature of Suit: Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255
Jury Demanded By: None

Available Case Documents

The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:

Date Filed Document Text
December 19, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 73 ORDER: On January 25, 2022, the Court issued an opinion and order denying Petitioner Baldeo's petition for a writ of error coram nobis and related claims. ECF No. 71. Baldeo appealed that order but failed to request a Certificate of Appea lability from this Court. ECF No. 72. The Court declines to issue a Certificate of Appealability. Baldeo has not made a "substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right." Yu v. United States, No. 07 CR 611 WHP, 2013 WL 118042 6, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 13, 2013). "[T]here can be no debate among reasonable jurists that Petitioner was not entitled to co ram nobis relief." Mutino v. United States, No. 04-CR-0876(JS), 2019 WL 4015156, at *7 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 23, 2019). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 12/19/2022) (va)
January 25, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 71 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 61 MOTION for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. filed by Albert Baldeo, 54 MOTION for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. filed by Albert Baldeo, 35 MOTION. filed by Albert Baldeo, 36 MOTION to Compel. filed by Alber t Baldeo, 32 MOTION PETITION FOR ERROR CORAM NOBIS, REVERSAL OF DECISION, RULE 60 : APPLICATION, ET AL. filed by Albert Baldeo, 62 MOTION for Writ of Error Coram Nobis. filed by Albert Baldeo, 55 MOTION for Writ. filed by Albert Baldeo. For the foregoing reasons, Baldeo's various claims for relief are denied. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate all open motions and petitions across both Baldeo's criminal (13-CR-125) and civil (17-CV-1692) dockets, and to close both cases. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 1/25/2022) (ama)
February 26, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 25 OPINION & ORDER re: 1 MOTION to Vacate , Set Aside or Correct Sentence (28 USC 2255). filed by Albert Baldeo. The Court denies Baldeo's Section 2255 petition and the request for an evidentiary hearing. The Court orders the Court reporter to correct the trial transcript at 1840:8-12 (available at ECF 117) as follows: the government may also demonstrate venue by proving that the defendant intended to affect an official proceeding, whether or not that proceeding was pending or about to be instituted, in this district The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the petition and close the cases. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 2/26/18) (yv)
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: Baldeo 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
Represented By: Martin Bell
Represented By: Daniel Charles Richenthal
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: Albert Baldeo
Represented By: Joshua Lewis Dratel
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?