Herrera v. United States
- 1:20-cv-02957
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Herrera v. United States, the court denied the petition except for vacating Count 40 without resentencing and closed the case.
Curt Herrera and the United States of America; Count 40 was vacated, while the remainder of the petition was denied.
What happened
In Herrera v. United States, Curt Herrera asked the Southern District of New York to grant his petition. The provided judgment does not explain the petition’s specific claims or the reasoning in the separate opinion it cites.
The court denied the petition except as to Count 40, which it vacated without resentencing. The denial does not prevent Herrera from renewing his claim if he later receives permission to challenge the validity of his life sentences. An amended judgment will issue separately.
The court, whose judge is not identified in the provided text, declined to issue a certificate of appealability. It also denied permission to appeal without paying court fees, certified that an appeal on the merits would not be taken in good faith, and closed the case.
The detailed version
- Herrera v. United States · No. 1:20-cv-02957
- June 20, 2024
Background
The provided document is a judgment in a case captioned Herrera v. United States. It refers to a petition filed by Curt Herrera and to a separate Opinion & Order dated June 20, 2024, but that Opinion & Order is not included in the supplied text. The judgment therefore does not state the petition’s specific legal claims or the court’s reasoning.
Ruling
The court denied the petition except as to Count 40. Count 40 was vacated without resentencing. The judgment states that the denial is without prejudice to Herrera renewing his claim if he is authorized to challenge the validity of his life sentences in the future. The court also stated that an amended judgment vacating Count 40 would issue separately.
Appeal and case status
The court determined that Herrera had not made a substantial showing that a constitutional right was denied and therefore did not issue a certificate of appealability. A certificate of appealability is permission required for certain appeals in this setting. The court also certified that an appeal from the judgment on the merits would not be taken in good faith and denied permission to appeal without paying court fees. The case was closed.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.