Rodriguez v. United States of America
| 1:2022cv06508 |
| August 1, 2022 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| Prisoner: Vacate Sentence |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2255 Motion to Vacate / Correct Illegal Sentenc |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
5
ORDER IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The CJA attorney on duty today, Michael D. Bradley, is appointed to represent defendant Eric Rodriguez pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act in connection with defendant's§ 2255 motion. 2. The Government is directed to respond to the defendant's motion within 45 days of the date of this order. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Sidney H. Stein on 2/14/2023) (jca)
|
|
Filing
4
ORDER TO AMEND: The Court finds that Movant' s application (ECF 1) can be construed as a motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. If Movant does not want to pursue relief under § 2255, he may notify the Court in writing within 60 days that he wishes to withdraw his motion. If Movant does not inform the Court of his intent within 60 days, the Court will construe this motion as a § 2255 motion. Movant is granted leave to file an amended motion under § 2255 containing al l of the grounds on which he seeks relief. The amended motion must be submitted to this Court's Pro Se Intake Unit within 60 days of the date of this order, be captioned as an "Amended Motion" and bear the same docket number as this order. An Amended Motion Under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 form is attached to this order. If Movant fails to comply with this order within the time allowed, and cannot show good cause to excuse such failure, the motion will be denied. Because Movant has not at this time made a 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). SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Sidney H. Stein on 8/9/2022) (ks)
|
|
Filing
2
ORDER: Defendant having filed a letter to the Court dated July 19, 2022 [ECF Doc. No 77], IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall open document no.77 as a Section 2255 motion and open it as a new civil action with a new civil docket number. The civil action shall be assigned to this Court's docket. (Signed by Judge Sidney H. Stein on 8/1/22) (rdz)
|
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 Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Rodriguez 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.
