Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

10-4589 - Locurto v. United States of America


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
10-4589 - Locurto v. United States of America
July 22, 2011
PDF | More
e, Tiffeny)ORDER: Petitioner's motion to stay proceedings relating to his petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 pending the Supreme Court's decision in Lafler v. Cooper, No. 10-209 (U.S. Jan. 7, 2011) is GRANTED. (See Docket Entry# 7.) The Government shall file a motion proposing a briefing schedule no later than fourteen days after the Supreme Court issues its decision in Lafler. The Clerk of Court is directed to choose a United States Magistrate Judge to decide non-dispositivematters in this case by random selection. Petitioner's motion to appoint counsel (Docket Entry# 4) is referred to the Magistrate Judge for decision pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(A) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a). The Magistrate Judge shall decide whether or not to stay Petitioner's motion to appoint counsel until after the Supreme Court's decision in Lafler. Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 7/20/2011. (c/m to pro se)(case referred to Magistrate Judge James Orenstein) (Le
August 12, 2016
PDF | More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS: For the reasons set forth above, the court OVERRULES the Government's objections and ADOPTS IN FULL Judge Orenstein's R&R. Accordingly, the court DENIES Plaintiff's motion with respect to the ineffectiveness of appellate counsel claim and DEFERS ruling on other claims pending litigation of an amended petition. Judge Orenstein may conduct an evidentiary hearing in reviewing the remainder of Petitioner's ineffectiveness of trial counsel claim. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 8/11/2016. (Lee, Tiffeny)
December 1, 2016
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM & ORDER re 61 Motion for Discovery. Because Petitioner has not shown "good cause" for his discovery request, the Discovery Motion 61 is DENIED. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 11/30/2016. (Lee, Tiffeny)
March 10, 2017
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM & ORDER re 114 Motion for Reconsideration. As Petitioner has not presented any compelling reason to reconsider the Discovery Order, his Motion for Reconsideration is DENIED. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 3/9/2017. (Lee, Tiffeny)
March 2, 2018
PDF | More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER, For the foregoing reasons, Ground Three of the Petition (Dkts. 1, 62) is DISMISSED as procedurally barred and Ground Four of the Petition is DISMISSED as time-barred. The request for evidentiary hearings as to Ground Three and Ground Four are DENIED. The parties are DIRECTED to confer and contact the court's Deputy at 718-613-2545 to schedule a status conference to discuss scheduling the evidentiary hearing on Ground One of the Petition. So Ordered by Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis on 2/28/2018. (Lee, Tiffeny)