Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Jan. 29, 2020

Dejesus v. United States

Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Docket
1:16-cv-05090
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
1
HabeasCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In DeJesus v. United States, Judge Ramos lifted the briefing stay and ordered the government to respond to DeJesus’s motion to vacate his conviction.

Who this affects

Eduardo DeJesus and the United States; the order sets the United States’ deadline to respond to DeJesus’s motion.

What happened

In DeJesus v. United States, Eduardo DeJesus filed a motion without a lawyer asking the court to vacate his conviction. The motion was filed under a federal law allowing prisoners to challenge their convictions or sentences.

The court had previously paused the briefing while awaiting a similar decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. That court issued its decision on August 30, 2019.

Judge Edgardo Ramos lifted the pause and ordered the United States to respond to DeJesus’s motion by February 19, 2020. The clerk was directed to mail DeJesus a copy of the order.

The detailed version

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

Case
Dejesus v. United States · No. 1:16-cv-05090
Judge
Edgardo Ramos
Date
Jan. 29, 2020

Background

On June 28, 2016, Eduardo DeJesus filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 asking the court to vacate his conviction. The motion was filed without a lawyer and opened civil docket number 16 Civ. 5090 (ER). The related criminal docket is 14 Cr. 83 (ER).

Prior stay

On May 4, 2017, the court granted the United States’ request to stay, or pause, briefing until the Second Circuit decided a similar case, United States v. Barrett, No. 14-2641-cr. The Second Circuit issued its decision on August 30, 2019, reported at 937 F.3d 126.

Ruling

The court lifted the stay on briefing and ordered the United States to respond to DeJesus’s motion by Wednesday, February 19, 2020. The clerk was directed to mail DeJesus a copy of the order. The opinion did not decide the merits of DeJesus’s motion to vacate his conviction.

The authoritative version

Read the full 1-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.