Lee v. United States of America
Plaintiff: Hisan Lee
Defendant: United States of America
Case Number: 1:2017cv08567
Filed: November 2, 2017
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
Presiding Judge: Loretta A. Preska
Nature of Suit: Motions to Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255
Jury Demanded By: None
RSS 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 31, 2023 Opinion or Order Filing 63 OPINION AND ORDER: re: 52 MOTION for Reconsideration re; 42 Memorandum & Opinion filed by Hisan Lee, 58 MOTION to Amend/Correct 1 Motion to Vacate/Set Aside/Correct Sentence (2255) filed by Hisan Lee. Before the Court is Petitioner Hisan Lee's pro se motion, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), for the Court to reconsider its March 17, 2022 Order and Opinion denying Petitioner's requested relief under 28 U.S.C. 2255 (f) (1), (dkt. no. 946), and Petitioner's motion to amend his previous 28 U.S.C. 2255(f) (1) motion, (dkt. no. 960). The Government shall respond to Petitioner's motions by June 14, 2023. Petitioner shall reply by June 28, 2023. The Clerk of the Court shall mail a copy of this order to the Petitioner. SO ORDERED., ( Responses due by 6/14/2023, Replies due by 6/28/2023.) (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 5/31/2023) (ama)
October 20, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 57 ORDER granting 56 Letter Motion to Stay re: 56 LETTER MOTION to Stay Defendant's Motion to Reconsider addressed to Judge Loretta A. Preska from Cecilia Vogel dated October 19, 2022. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 10/20/2022) (ate)
August 10, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 53 ORDER with respect to 52 Motion for Reconsideration re 52 MOTION for Reconsideration re: 42 Memorandum & Opinion, filed by Hisan Lee. The Court is in receipt of Petitioner Hisan Lee's motion for reconsideration, pursuant to Fed eral Rule of Civil Procedure 59(e), seeking this Court to alter or amend its Opinion and Order dated March 17, 2022, denying Petitioner's motion under 28. U.S.C. § 2255. (Dkt. no. 946 in 07-cr-0003.) The Government shall respond to Petitioner's motion no later than September 9, 2022. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 8/10/2022) (va)
March 17, 2022 Opinion or Order Filing 42 OPINION AND ORDER: For the foregoing reasons, Defendant's pro se § 2255 petition (Mot. Vacate; dkt. no. 1 in 17-cv-8567) is denied. Because Mr. Lee has not "made a substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right," a c ertificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c) (2). The Court certifies under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a) (3) that any appeal from this order would not be taken in good faith, and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied fo r purpose of an appeal. Cf. Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962) (holding that an appellant demonstrates good faith when he seeks review of a nonfrivolous issue). The Clerk of the Court is directed to close the open motions (dkt. no . 686 in 07-cr-0003; dkt. no. 1 in 17-cv-8567; dkt. no. 13 in 17-cv-8567) and close case number 17-cv-8567. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to mail a copy of this order to Mr. Lee. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 3/17/2022) (kv) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
November 25, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 40 ORDER denying 13 Motion to Appoint Counsel ; with respect to 13 Letter Motion for Discovery; with respect to 13 Motion for Hearing. The Court is in receipt of Defendant Hisan Lee's motion [dkt. no. 878 in 07-CR-03] requesting compas sionate release due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government shall respond to Mr. Lee's motion no later than December 28, 2020. Mr. Lee shall file any reply by January 27, 2021. Because Mr. Lee's motion is straightforward, the request for counsel is denied. The Clerk of the Court shall mail a copy of this order to Mr. Lee. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 11/25/2020) (va) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
June 2, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 36 ORDER: The Court is in receipt of Mr. Lee's letter dated May 19 (dkt. no. 850). Mr. Lee's time to reply to the Government's papers is extended to July 14, 2020. Chambers will mail a copy of this order and the Government's response (dkt. no. 848). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 6/02/2020) (ama)
January 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 31 ORDER re: 29 Remark filed by Hisan Lee: The Government shall respond to Petitioner Hisan Lee's motion dated September 12, 2019 [dkt. no. 29] no later than February 15, 2020. The Clerk of the Court shall mail a copy of this order to Hisan Lee. (Signed by Judge Loretta A. Preska on 1/13/2020) (jwh) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
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: Lee 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: Cecilia Vogel
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: Hisan Lee
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?