Jean v. United States of America
Petitioner: Maxo Jean
Respondent: United States of America
Case Number: 1:2018cv02888
Filed: March 30, 2018
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
County: New York
Presiding Judge: Denny Chin
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
December 7, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 18 ORDER: Accordingly, Mr. Jean's Rule 4(a) (6) motion is GRANTED. The Second Circuit determined that Mr. Jean's notice of appeal, docketed June 28, 2021, 13 Cr. 280 Dkt. No. 109, was untimely. Now that this Court has granted Mr. Jean's R ule 4(a) (6) motion, his June 28, 2021, notice of appeal is deemed timely filed. Mr. Jean shall notify the Second Circuit of this order within 30 days of its entry. The Clerk of the Court is directed to mail a copy of this order, and another copy of the Court's January 8, 2021, order, to defendant at the address listed below. [**Mailed this Order to defendant Maxo Jean at address listed on the Order**] SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 12/7/21) (rdz) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
January 8, 2021 Opinion or Order Filing 14 DECISION AND ORDER: For the reasons set forth above, Mr. Jean has failed to show a basis for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Accordingly, his motion for relief is DENIED. Because Mr. Jean has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a c onstitutional right, I decline to issue a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (as amended by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act). I certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal taken from this order would not be taken in good faith. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 1/8/2021) (nb)
July 22, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER: Defendant Maxo Jean, currently incarcerated in Philipsburg, Pennsylvania and proceeding pro se, moves pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence entered in the underlying criminal case. For the reasons se t forth below, the Court transfers this matter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In his submission, Jean argues that his sentence should be vacated because there is no record that the grand jury that indicted him was compr ised of 12 or more members and therefore did not comply with the Fifth Amendment. I previously denied a § 2255 motion filed by Jean, see United States v. Jean, No. 13-cr-280 (DC), 2018 WL 4771530, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 3, 2018), and I reaffirmed that decision on January 23, 2020, see Crim. Dkt. No. 97; Civ. Dkt. No. 9. A defendant needs permission from the Circuit court to file a successive § 2255 motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h). In the interest of justice, the Court transfers this matter to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to decide whether to grant Jean leave to file another successive § 2255 motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 1631; see also Liriano v. United States, 95 F.3d 119, 122-23 (2d Cir. 1996) . This order closes this action. If the Court of Appeals authorizes Jean to file a successive motion, he shall move to reopen this case under the civil docket number. As the motion makes no substantial showing of a denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability will not issue. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253. The Court certifies pursuant to 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 for the purpose of an appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962). (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 7/22/2020) (rj) Transmission to Appeals Clerk.
January 23, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER. Defendant Maxo Jean, proceeding prose, moves for reconsideration of my October 3, 2018 decision denying his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. For the reasons set forth in my October 3, 2018 decision, his motion is DENIED, and as further specified and set forth in this Order. Accordingly, Jean's motion for reconsideration is DENIED. SO ORDERED. Denying 7 Motion for Reconsideration. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 1/23/2020) (rjm)
October 3, 2018 Opinion or Order Filing 6 OPINION re: 1 MOTION to Vacate, Set Aside or Correct Sentence (28 U.S.C. 2255). For the reasons set forth above, Jean has failed to show a basis for relief under 28 U. S.C. § 2255. Accordingly, his petition is denied. Because he has not made a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right, I decline to issue a certificate of appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253 (1996) (as amended by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act). I certify pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal taken from this order would not be taken in good faith. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Denny Chin on 10/3/2018) (anc)
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: Jean 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 ]
Respondent: 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 ]
Petitioner: Maxo Jean
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?