Antonetti v. United States of America
Case Number: 1:2018cv07239
Filed: July 27, 2020
Court: US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Office: Foley Square Office
Nature of Suit: Prisoner: Vacate Sentence
Cause of Action: 28:2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc

Available Case Documents

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

Date Filed Document Text
November 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 13 ORDER: In light of the above, Antonetti's motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255 and the related supplemental motions are DENIED as moot. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate the motions on criminal docket 02-CR-1232 (ECF Nos. 47, 51, 52). The Clerk of Court is hereby directed to terminate civil docket 18-CV-7239 and to send to the parties appeal instructions. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 11/10/2020) (va) Transmission to Docket Assistant Clerk for processing.
October 13, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 12 ORDER: The Court will hold a teleconference, for the Petitioner's resentencing, on Wednesday, October 21, 2020, at 11 :00 a.m. To join the teleconference, the parties should dial 888-363-4749 and enter access code 1613818. ( Telephone Conference set for 10/21/2020 at 11:00 AM before Judge Kimba M. Wood.) (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 10/13/2020) (tro)
August 12, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 11 ORDER: Due to a conflict in the Court's calendar, the hearing currently scheduled for October 20, 2020, is moved to October 21, 2020, at 11:00 a.m. SO ORDERED. ( Status Conference set for 10/21/2020 at 11:00 AM before Judge Kimba M. Wood.) (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 8/12/2020) (va)
August 10, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 10 ORDER: Therefore, it is Ordered that: The Court appoints CJA counsel on duty August 10, 2020, David A. Ruhnke, for the purpose of advising Petitioner in advance of and during resentencing. The parties shall appear for a hearing on Octobe r 20, 2020, at which time the Government will consent to the vacatur of the § 924(c) charge and the Court will resentence Petitioner on the remaining counts of conviction. A Supplemental Presentence Investigation Report is due to the Court o n October 6, 2020. Any sentencing submissions by Petitioner must be made by October 12, 2020, and must state specifically whether Petitioner contests any fact in the Supplemental Pre-sentence Investigation Report, and whether Petitioner contests the appropriateness of the Probation Officer's Sentencing Recommendation. Probation should contact Chambers if they experience difficulty in scheduling the pre-sentence interview, or if the Supplemental PSR will not be completed in a timely fashion. Any response or other submission from the Government is due October 16, 2020. SO ORDERED. Attorney David Arthur Ruhnke for Jose Antonetti added. (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 8/10/2020) (va)
July 27, 2020 Opinion or Order Filing 9 ORDER: Petitioner Jose Antonetti has filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. (ECF No. 47.1) On September 30, 2019, Petitioner requested that the Court take notice of the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Davis, 139 S. Ct. 2319 (2019). (ECF No. 59.) The Government is hereby ordered to respond to Petitioner's citation to Davis by August 5, 2020. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Kimba M. Wood on 7/27/2020) (va)
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: Antonetti 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 ]

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?