Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Mar. 5, 2025

Beato-Estrella v. United States

Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Docket
1:25-cv-01807
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
HabeasCriminalCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Beato-Estrella v. United States, Judge Hellerstein dismissed Domingo Beato-Estrella’s sentence-challenge petitions without prejudice because his direct appeal was pending.

Who this affects

Domingo Beato-Estrella’s two federal sentence-challenge petitions were dismissed without prejudice while his direct appeal was pending; the United States was the respondent.

What happened

In Beato-Estrella v. United States, Domingo Beato-Estrella pleaded guilty under a plea agreement and received a principal sentence of 88 months’ imprisonment. He filed a direct appeal on February 25, 2025.

Three days later, Beato-Estrella filed two petitions asking the court to vacate, set aside, or correct his conviction and sentence under Section 2255, a federal law allowing a person in federal custody to challenge a conviction or sentence. His direct appeal was still pending.

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein dismissed both petitions without prejudice because they were filed before the direct appeal was complete. The clerk was directed to close the two civil cases and terminate the listed motions.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Beato-Estrella v. United States · No. 1:25-cv-01807
Judge
Alvin Hellerstein
Date
Mar. 5, 2025

Background

Domingo Beato-Estrella pleaded guilty under a plea agreement and received a principal sentence of 88 months’ imprisonment. He filed a direct appeal in the Second Circuit on February 25, 2025. On February 28, 2025, while that appeal was pending, he filed two petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 seeking to vacate, set aside, or correct his conviction and sentence.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that a Section 2255 petition filed before the petitioner has completed a direct appeal is generally considered premature. District courts generally dismiss such petitions when a direct appeal is pending. The court therefore did not reach the substance of Beato-Estrella’s challenges to his conviction or sentence.

Ruling

Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein dismissed Beato-Estrella’s Section 2255 petitions without prejudice to refiling after he has exhausted his appeal. The clerk was ordered to close Civil Cases Nos. 25 Civ. 1806 and 25 Civ. 1807 and terminate all motions in those cases. The clerk was also ordered to terminate specified filings in the related criminal cases and mail Beato-Estrella a copy of the order.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.