Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled June 17, 2020

Vuksanaj v. United States

Judge
John Keenan
Docket
1:16-cv-04407
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
3
HabeasCriminalSentencing
In one sentence

In Vuksanaj v. United States, Judge Keenan lifted the stay and set a response deadline before deciding Vuksanaj’s sentence-vacatur motion.

Who this affects

Joseph Vuksanaj, whose sentence-vacatur motion remained pending and who was given until August 5, 2020, to respond; the government, whose request to lift the stay was granted.

What happened

Vuksanaj v. United States concerns Joseph Vuksanaj’s request to undo his conviction and sentence for possessing a firearm in connection with a crime of violence. The request relied on a Supreme Court decision concerning the definition of a crime of violence.

The government argued that the request should be denied because the Second Circuit had ruled that Hobbs Act robbery qualifies as a crime of violence for this firearm law. The case had been paused while related court decisions were pending.

Judge John F. Keenan ordered the clerk to end the pause and gave Vuksanaj until August 5, 2020, to respond to the government’s letter. The order did not itself decide the motion; absent another order, the motion would be treated as ready for decision on that date.

The detailed version

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

Case
Vuksanaj v. United States · No. 1:16-cv-04407
Judge
John Keenan
Date
June 17, 2020

Background

Joseph Vuksanaj filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255, a federal procedure allowing a person convicted in federal court to seek to vacate, set aside, or correct a conviction or sentence. The motion sought to vacate his conviction on Count 19 under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), which imposes penalties for using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence. The motion argued that the conviction was invalid under Johnson v. United States because the predicate offense was not a crime of violence.

The predicate offense was identified as Hobbs Act robbery under 18 U.S.C. § 1951. The court had stayed the case on February 2, 2018, while potentially relevant Supreme Court and Second Circuit decisions were pending.

Government’s Position

The government told the court that the stay should be lifted and that Vuksanaj’s motion should be denied. It relied on the Second Circuit’s decision in a prior case, which held that Hobbs Act robbery is a crime of violence under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(3)(A).

Order

Judge John F. Keenan ordered the clerk to terminate the stay and mail Vuksanaj a copy of the order and the government’s letter. Vuksanaj was given until August 5, 2020, to file a response. Unless the court issued another order, the motion would be considered fully submitted on that date. The order did not grant or deny Vuksanaj’s motion to vacate his conviction and sentence.

The authoritative version

Read the full 3-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.